Does anyone have a TLDR about this story? I haven't had the time to follow all the drama.
tl;dr: Politics 101.
Prediction, the side that forked loses.
Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
41–50 of 186 posts
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#42Node community is going to argue its way into obscurity.
While the snark of this comment may push it into obscurity by those who hate snarky comments, I totally agree. I was surprised we could even still have Node.js after the huge Node.js vs io.js debacle. I think all of these arguments are about important issues, but they also can give a very negative impression to outsiders (not to mention how insiders aware of all the facts may feel). That said, I am at least happy to…
Perhaps counterintuitively, debate and dissent can make projects stronger. I definitely would say that was the case with the iojs fork and subsequent merge. This time I am much more unfamiliar with the goings-on, so I can't say if it will happen again.
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#43TLDR: core contributor displeases blue-haired SF nobodies, who fail to evict him from the project. They proceed to throw a temper-tantrum and create a useless fork which so far has done nothing but bike-shedding.
While you most likely made that comment in jest. Stereotyping everyone into a category like "blue-haired SF nobodies" is rather offensive.
Not saying I disagree about the temper-tantrum, but there was no reason to state it in the way you did.
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#44Having reviewed the relevant tweets/GitHub issues/blog posts, I feel most of the noise is generated by people who make it their mission to find things about which to be outraged. The NodeJS brand has the momentum necessary to build great things. If they squander it by cry-wolf-forking every time there is an internal disagreement, another JS engine (e.g. Chakra) will take the helm.
> The NodeJS brand has the momentum necessary to build great things. If they squander it by cry-wolf-forking every time there is an internal disagreement, another JS engine (e.g. Chakra) will take the helm.
Node.js is not an engine, Node.js uses the V8 engine (same engine that powers the Chrome browser). Technically you could use Node.js with the Chakra engine or other JavaScript engines.
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#45TLDR: core contributor displeases blue-haired SF nobodies, who fail to evict him from the project. They proceed to throw a temper-tantrum and create a useless fork which so far has done nothing but bike-shedding.
While you most likely made that comment in jest. Stereotyping everyone into a category like "blue-haired SF nobodies" is rather offensive. Not saying I disagree about the temper-tantrum, but there was no reason to state it in the way you did.
Yes, you are right, it was an unnecessary jab...and I apologise if this offends.
The frustrated comment I gave is from the perspective of someone who is not an american; I don't see american californians as the moral authority of how open source software must be developed.
It is a sad day when politics must be paramount when contributing to a foss project. If developers wanted this burden they'd need look no further than working in a soul-crushing multinational mega-corp.
EDIT: please do not downvote the parent comment to this. He/she has commented to continue discussion, if you disagree please discuss, not downvote.
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#46This has echoes of Title IX proceedings. From the account above.
> Some time ago I received notification via email that there are complaints against me. No details were provided and I was informed that I would neither receive those details or be involved in the whatever process was to take place. Further, TSC members were not allowed to speak to me directly about these matters, including my work colleagues also on the TSC. I was never provided with an opportunity to understand the specific charges against me or be involved in any discussions on this topic from that point onward.
From the article below, [1]
> Right away, the accused is cautioned about confidentiality: s/he is warned not to discuss the pending complaint with colleagues or students. The accused will only learn of the accusations against them when s/he meets face-to-face with the local Title IX enforcement squad.
Kangaroo court.
[1] http://quillette.com/2017/08/24/survived-title-ix-star-chamb...
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#47Shame how such a cool project as node.js can drown in political fingerpointing. The only measurement that counts (in my opinion) is cold hard code contributions.
It's a little extreme to say that cold hard code is the only thing that counts. Years ago I worked with someone who contributed more cold hard code than anyone else I've known. A brilliant developer, probably one of those "10X" people they talk about: that rare combination of outstanding technical chops and "get the job done" productivity. But more than once, he jumped into projects and features that he knew other pe…
That's not brilliant, IMO. Just someone who knows how to program but not work on a team.
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#48Are long-winded quarrels and dysfunctions unique to node core, or is node core just transparent in documenting the making of the sausage?
No, libreboot did as well: https://libreboot.org/news/unity.html
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#49He is clear, logical, and reasonable.
Poor guy, they will eat him alive.
Re: Rod Vagg's statement on the request to be removed from the Node.js CTC
#50What I'm completely missing in this discussion of Code of Conduct violation is a specific list of which actions violated which clauses in this Code of Conduct.
I see a list of complaints, but for an outsider it is really hard to follow why these actions are considered to be CoC violations.
Take this, for instance:
"In [moderation repository discussion], Rod’s first action was to apologize to a contributor who had been repeatedly moderated. Rod did not discuss the issue with other members of the CTC/TSC first. The result undermined the moderation process as it was occurring. It also undercut the authority as moderators of other CTC/TSC members."
Do you know how this reads? A case is being made against a "toxic" person who "repeatedly breaks CoC" and the first complaint against him is that he apologized to a contributor? Really? I just don't get this.