Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC • Hacker News Board

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#161

Post by gaius » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 6:09 AM UTC

thehardsphere wrote: post #105

orless wrote: post #70

As a thought experiment imagine your manager asks you about the new node.js fork and whether you should switch to it. What would you say?

If your manager is aware enough of the situation to know there is a fork, but is not aware enough to know that the fork is pure politics, it might be time to change managers. That is such an odd superposition of being simultaneously informed and not that one couldn't help but wonder what other strategic mistakes would happen.

News of this has made mainstream tech news sites like El Reg. That's how I originally heard about it, I don't do much Github these days.

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#162

Post by bhouston » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 10:19 AM UTC

echaozh wrote: post #143

bhouston wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In real-life, outside of 10,000 word github issues, one should call those you are having problems with and talk about it. That is how you resolve these issues. You show empathy, you show understanding, you take more responsibility that you deserve because you have a strong ego, you focus on the future and how best to achieve joint success, you show some flexibility, you get a mutually beneficial resolution or an agre…

When people defame you in the public, to talk to people in the private don't solve all the problems. The public need to hear from both sides. You don't like to hear the defense, all right. Just don't try to stop other people from hearing it.

> When people defame you in the public, to talk to people in the private don't solve all the problems. The public need to hear from both sides.

Only if you want to run a negative sum game for all involved. This is a horrible strategy to engage in. You only end up also wrecking your own reputation and others and wasting a ton of time.

The socially mature thing to do is resolve this behind closed doors and be flexible as I suggested.

He may get some success by playing the martyr, but it will be success that occurs by his aggression, stubbornness and by expending more efforts in polemics than others. In the end he might still be standing but everyone around him will be wounded metaphorically because of this (mostly via huge wastes of time because of difficult conversations and departures of people from the project.)

Anyone who wants to run a company focused on results and to avoid unnecessary drama should avoid this type of character like the plague.

This behavior he is currently engaging in is a huge red flag if you recognize it for what it is.

Again, he is engaging in a strategy that forces everyone into a negative sum game, which is itself a form of aggression -- and it is easy to recognize from this github issue as I've seen this before close up. It is not a smart thing to do and should have been avoided by doing things differently long ago.

He can still pull up by basically retracting all of this and re-engaging in a mature and flexible manner that shows some contrition/empathy -- but that requires a strong ego, social maturity, and flexibility which may not be something that is possible on his part at this time. Everyone he is dealing with would love that I am sure, even at this stage, because it will stop the negative sum game.

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#163

Post by feduzi » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 11:22 AM UTC

What is wrong with Node.js governance (except Rod's case)? Is there any list of such problems?

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#164

Post by ocfx » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 12:37 PM UTC

s73ver_ wrote: post #106

retox wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to be taken seriously by these troublemaking outrage addicts as a while male, you need to get a weird haircut and to dye your hair a few different colors. Chunky glasses are a plus.

Statements like yours do nothing to help matters.

There is nothing to address or help. The people getting outraged are such an insignificant yet vocal minority. Their entire existence revolves around feeling victimized so they will use any opportunity to call attention to their victimhood.

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#165

Post by rdtsc » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 12:56 PM UTC

tracker1 wrote: post #155

rdtsc wrote: post #67

It was pretty hard to discern what happened. A lot of text and veiled insinuations. He is how far I got: It was this article tweeted by Rod: http://quillette.com/2017/07/18/neurodiversity-case-free-spe... Which was noticed by a member of the community: https://twitter.com/captainsafia/status/887782785221615618 Does that describe it? Maybe someone has a more clear summary One thing I noticed is that Node.js community…

Weren't a couple guys at a Python conference fired for telling a joke in a line that someone else overheard? I mean the backlash was just as bad.. but that seems pretty similar.

That's one scandal I can think can of in such a large community.

Node had the "pronoun" scandal and the power struggle between strongloop and joyent.

The left-pad one which broke a ridiculous number of packages.

Crockford removed as speaker from some conference.

Project was forked at least 2 times IO.js vs node.js vs Ayo.js

While not a single scandal I have noticed in personal interactions while interviewing candidates, conferences, and online in forums that node.js devs seem to be very excited and confident and that's good, but also they don't know what they are talking about. That combination doesn't come off too well. That's why my "immaturity" comment. Maybe I am wrong and just happened to find all the bad apples by accident.

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#166

Post by lightedman » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 1:34 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #132

lightedman wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It looks like you've been using HN primarily for political/ideological battle. That's destructive of what the site is for," Then why is this entire thread and subject here? It's entirely political and ideological.

Note that word 'primarily'. It is the important distinction here. Occasionally commenting on a political issue isn't a problem as long as you do it civilly; some overlap with political topics is unavoidable. But when political battles become the thing you're primarily using HN comments for, that's when it becomes abusive. HN's purpose is the gratification of intellectual curiosity. We can't be that and be a political…

"HN's purpose is the gratification of intellectual curiosity. We can't be that and be a political battlefield at the same time"

Incorrect - that's what communication is entirely about. And communication is what you're destroying.

"Note that word 'primarily'. It is the important distinction here."

No, the distinction is "political/ideological battle. That's destructive of what the site is for," If it's destructive to the site why is this entire thread about Rod Vagg here? It's entirely political and has nothing to do with technical merits of Node.js, at all. Every last bit of it is 100% internal politics, and as you state, this site isn't the place for it.

If you're capable of actually living up to your "This isn't the place for political/ideological battles" then this entire thread needs to be purged from the site.

Because otherwise this is pure hypocrisy.

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#167

Post by phiskk » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 1:44 PM UTC

bhouston wrote: post #125

kuyan wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I recognized from experience that what I was reading was not a productive response to the situation at hand, but a defensive one. What would a productive response be? I agree that getting unnecessarily mired in drama is counterproductive, but I don't think that these accusations could have been reasonably ignored, nor do I know what Rod could (or should) have done differently.

In real-life, outside of 10,000 word github issues, one should call those you are having problems with and talk about it. That is how you resolve these issues. You show empathy, you show understanding, you take more responsibility that you deserve because you have a strong ego, you focus on the future and how best to achieve joint success, you show some flexibility, you get a mutually beneficial resolution or an agre…

Perhaps you should be telling this to those who launched a witchhunt against Rod because he undermined their oppression tool. They certainly didn't try to "call those you are having problems with and talk about it."

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#168

Post by geofft » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 1:56 PM UTC

GenericsMotors wrote: post #115

geofft wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yeah - his response was definitely reasonable if the facts are that the supposed evidence against him was trumped up and he's in the right. I'm just trying to figure out if his response is also what I'd expect to see if the facts are that the supposed evidence against him is completely accurate and that he's a toxic contributor who's trying to hurt the project.

So he is condemned in your eyes, not matter what evidence is presented?

Huh? That's rather the opposite of what I'm saying.

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#169

Post by geofft » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 1:58 PM UTC

mcphage wrote: post #120

geofft wrote: post #14

A bit of a thought experiment for myself: suppose that Rod were as terrible as the worst possible claims made against him. (I am confident he's not.) Suppose he were actively, consciously hoping to deceive and harm the Node community. (I am also confident he's not.) What sort of statement would he write? How much would it look like this one?

"You say you're not a witch? Why, that's exactly what a witch would say!"

Well, yes, the statement "I'm not a witch" is of zero information value. It's ridiculous to conclude "That's exactly what a witch would say, therefore I believe more that you are a witch", but it's equally ridiculous to conclude "That's exactly what a non-witch would say, therefore I believe more that you aren't a witch." You should not have your beliefs changed at all by the fact that someone claims not to be a witch (unless you believe that witches are unwilling to lie, or something).

I'm trying to figure out if this response is similarly of zero information value - interesting, but should not convince me either that he's in the right or that he's in the wrong - or of nonzero information value, convincing me that he's in the right. I'm currently leaning towards the former.

Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC

#170

Post by phiskk » Sat, Aug 26, 2017, 2:43 PM UTC

bhouston wrote: post #162

echaozh wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people defame you in the public, to talk to people in the private don't solve all the problems. The public need to hear from both sides. You don't like to hear the defense, all right. Just don't try to stop other people from hearing it.

> When people defame you in the public, to talk to people in the private don't solve all the problems. The public need to hear from both sides. Only if you want to run a negative sum game for all involved. This is a horrible strategy to engage in. You only end up also wrecking your own reputation and others and wasting a ton of time. The socially mature thing to do is resolve this behind closed doors and be flexible…

This isn't unnecessary drama on Rod's part. He is standing in the line of fire to shield the rest of his community from a McCarthyesque witchhunt conducted by SJWs, who are the real source of the drama.