I mentioned the dialog in IBM's back channels because Doug himself was pushing a participant there once he got some traction in that more appropriate venue: "No

I mentioned the dialog in IBM's back channels because Doug himself was pushing a participant there once he got some traction in that more appropriate venue: "Now, please stop contacting me as a side channel without the context of the conversations I have been having with IBM. Please get involved in the existing IBM channels I have, so you have context here." You are correct: Doug does give excellent reasons for supporting the project under the expressjs org, the same reasons brought up back when the github ownership of the project changed (as in the issue you linked). The public debate only served to confuse and frustrate watchers, and that is the "soap opera" I refer to. It's unfortunate that sometimes such public drama is necessary to effect change, but as evidenced by the issue raised when the repo was taken over originally, public drama wasn't going to effect any change here. It now serves only to foment ill-will and promote confusion, regardless of who is "right". You are also right that we should be thankful for OSS contributors' efforts. I am thankful for his. For StrongLoop's too, in fact. I am, however, not thankful for the wasted energy in maintaining the debate on a github issue, when the debate didn't do any good the first time 'round. I am not thankful that politics have derailed the work. EDIT: I think you misunderstood my "be the best..." comment. I was merely suggesting that Doug would find himself less stressed if he was able to focus on doing what he loves and not playing politics.