This story is getting annoying.
Not quite as annoying as having hundreds of raging angry people name-calling and character-assassinating you over a mistake.
Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community
121–126 of 126 posts
Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community
#122What would it take for Node to be taken out from under Joyent's arm to be setup as its own project?
Joyent has izs, that's mainly it. Strongloop does biggest part of development, and before Strongloop it was Cloud9.
I guess putting node in a foundation would make the most sense.
Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your spin attempt ignored the part where he reverted someone else's commit with a threatening message. Nobody would ge talking about it if he had simply ignored it or asked Isaac about it first.
Here's his revert message, copied from below, in the full: "@isaacs may have his commit bit but that does not mean he is at liberty to land patches at will. All patches have to be signed off by either me or Bert. Isaac, consider yourself chided." Refers to a procedural matter, kind of snarky. Hardly 'threatening'. Does not discuss the pronoun, content of the revert, or any content related to gender issues at all. By…
Between the commit wording and his comment on IRC (https://twitter.com/ArmyOfBruce/status/406802499014627328) I read that as implicitly threatening Isaac's commit bit but that was wrong. I shouldn't have stated that: it would have been more accurate to describe it as confrontational rather than a threat.
> By the way, it's rather fatuous to refer to my comment as a 'spin attempt' just because I didn't reflexively grab my pitchfork and torch and run out to join the mob trying to crucify this developer as a incorrigible misogynist
I described it as spin because it focused on the initial commit & the grammar issues rather than the way Ben chose to escalate it. Your choice of quotes and commentary focused on the beginning rather than what happened afterwards, neatly omitting the actual focus of the discussion. Perhaps that was accidental but it sure looks like an attempt to minimize the offense before criticizing the response.
Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No one should be threatened for either supporting or not supporting a political cause or brand of activism. You should read before commenting: the problem wasn't his choice of wording but rather how he turned a trivial change into an argument and reverted another committer's action complete with a threat. If he didn't want to get involved, simply ignoring it was by far the easiest course of action. Instead, he twic…
You should read before commenting. Ben never threatened anyone. Stop spreading this falsehood.
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6834047, in particular the IRC comment:
bnoordhuis> isaacs: ^ don't ever fucking pull a stunt like thatRe: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's his revert message, copied from below, in the full: "@isaacs may have his commit bit but that does not mean he is at liberty to land patches at will. All patches have to be signed off by either me or Bert. Isaac, consider yourself chided." Refers to a procedural matter, kind of snarky. Hardly 'threatening'. Does not discuss the pronoun, content of the revert, or any content related to gender issues at all. By…
I would really appreciate it if acdha could explain how they view this comment as a threat. acdha made the same claim elsewhere in this thread as well. It appears that some people are attempting to lower the bar for something to be a "threat" to be any statement made by someone they don't like (or they've been told not to like).
Just in case you didn't see my sibling comment, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6834047. The IRC comment was where I saw the most threat:
bnoordhuis> isaacs: ^ don't ever fucking pull a stunt like that
Re: Collaboration not Derision in the Node Community
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ben was called a bigot and his rejection of the pull request was ascribed to the "principle that pronouns should in fact be gendered" (from the Joyent blog). The problem is, all of this is being extrapolated from his statement "sorry, not interested in trivial changes like that", which could be seen as a flippant dismissal of gender issues in the tech industry - or it could be simply a curt response acknowledging sta…
Well, there you go: https://github.com/joyent/libuv/pull/1015#issuecomment-29568...
"To the people that felt it necessary to call me a misogynist: I volunteer in a mentorship program that gets young people - especially young women - involved in technology. How many of you go out and actively try to increase the number of women in the field?"
This is sort of like the "but my best friend is black" defense, but in this case I think it demonstrates that defense is not always invalid.