Live data from Hacker News

GitHub: Block the Bullies

github.com

11–20 of 151 posts

Re: GitHub: Block the Bullies

#11
It's a logical feature for a site with a social aspect to offer, and I'm surprised github hadn't done so previously. I suppose the audience for the site tends to be mature.

Good for Github for going ahead and doing it. I know of some companies who would have dug their heels in and ignored the issue, or stubbornly maintained that it wasn't needed.

Re: GitHub: Block the Bullies

#13

This is a very good feature, but I am also afraid it will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change. "If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent. The fact that controversy and negativity attracts eyeballs and can trigger improve…

Just because you can identify the mechanism by which this most-basic feature of social networks was implemented, that doesn't mean that it's a bad thing.

The cart should not be put before the horse by implying that this missing feature was simply used as an excuse to be negative. What's the perverse incentive here, that it's actually in GitHub's interest to prevent users from blocking each other?

"The squeaky wheel gets the grease" and public shame were invented way before the Internet, so this makes no precedent. It's just one of the myriad ways in which things get done. Ever had a boss?

Re: GitHub: Block the Bullies

#14
post #9
post #2

Is this due to the recent drama with Zed Shaw being invited to the "DongML" project? Very entertaining as an observer, but very annoying for Zed I'm sure. Sad that they still haven't added a requirement that you accept an invite to become a collaborator, or at least a profile setting on your account that requires that confirmation.

It's interesting to me that so many people want confirmations. You can remove yourself from any repository you wish at https://github.com/account/repositories (yes, I know — this is a confusing place. It's something I'd like to improve). But the idea is that "Confirm? Reject." is the same number of steps/interactions as "Added. Reject." Confirmations wouldn't make the experience any better for someone being annoyingl…

I tend to agree with this line of thinking. I was added to half a dozen projects today alone. It would have been a pain to have to confirm each one.

Your average professional developer isn't trolled on a regular basis, nor would they go about adding "tech stars" to their repos just to have a big name on there or because they wished that person was a contributor - it's unprofessional and rude. So just dismissing yourself from the projects you are maliciously or mistakenly added to seems much simpler than having to confirm each one.

Re: GitHub: Block the Bullies

#15
post #13

This is a very good feature, but I am also afraid it will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change. "If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent. The fact that controversy and negativity attracts eyeballs and can trigger improve…

Just because you can identify the mechanism by which this most-basic feature of social networks was implemented, that doesn't mean that it's a bad thing. The cart should not be put before the horse by implying that this missing feature was simply used as an excuse to be negative. What's the perverse incentive here, that it's actually in GitHub's interest to prevent users from blocking each other? "The squeaky wheel g…

Ralph Nader was also pretty good at it.

Re: GitHub: Block the Bullies

#16

This is a very good feature, but I am also afraid it will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change. "If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent. The fact that controversy and negativity attracts eyeballs and can trigger improve…

> will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change.

To be fair, in this case, that does appear to be exactly what happened. Github had a problem. Someone exposed it and then Zed used his considerable influence to "force" github to fix it.

Re: GitHub: Block the Bullies

#18

I think zed had a reasonable complaint. was he a jerk about it? maybe, but it's a customer's prerogative to complain about a bad experience. github's prompt response to zed has made me a happier (paying) customer. way to go!

Zed had a very reasonable complaint, if a bit thin skinned.

Re: GitHub: Block the Bullies

#19

I think zed had a reasonable complaint. was he a jerk about it? maybe, but it's a customer's prerogative to complain about a bad experience. github's prompt response to zed has made me a happier (paying) customer. way to go!

YEP! Props to Zed. After calling a bunch of people homophobes and writing some code to engage in an asshole war within the confines of GitHub, he got a simple feature implemented that would have probably been fast tracked with a reasonable email.

Re: GitHub: Block the Bullies

#20
post #9
post #2

Is this due to the recent drama with Zed Shaw being invited to the "DongML" project? Very entertaining as an observer, but very annoying for Zed I'm sure. Sad that they still haven't added a requirement that you accept an invite to become a collaborator, or at least a profile setting on your account that requires that confirmation.

It's interesting to me that so many people want confirmations. You can remove yourself from any repository you wish at https://github.com/account/repositories (yes, I know — this is a confusing place. It's something I'd like to improve). But the idea is that "Confirm? Reject." is the same number of steps/interactions as "Added. Reject." Confirmations wouldn't make the experience any better for someone being annoyingl…

I agree that I don't want to see confirmations in my GitHub, but you are incorrect about them being equivalent. The optimal way to use confirmations is often not hitting "Reject" to requests you don't want. Just do nothing. In most well-designed systems, as long as there's an outstanding request, they can't bug you any more.
Post reply on HN