4 ms·

That's not much of a reflection: >We stand by our package name dispute resolution policy, and the decision to which it led us. There is no discussion of the t

That's not much of a reflection: >We stand by our package name dispute resolution policy, and the decision to which it led us. There is no discussion of the transcripts, or the violations of the NPM Code of Conduct[0] that occurred during the takeover. A very popular community member was harassed and NPM took part in it. I haven't seen this issue addressed by any NPM representative. >Harassing other users of the Service is never tolerated, whether via public or private media. >Harassment includes, but is not limited to: ... inappropriate use of nudity, sexual images, and/or sexually explicit language in public spaces; threats of physical or non-physical harm; [0] https://www.npmjs.com/policies/conduct https://www.npmjs.com/policies/conduct NPM not only tolerated harassment, but sided with the harasser.

alainv 11y ago
Harassed? Really? The undisputed transcript[0] doesn't really support that view, in my opinion. [0] https://medium.com/@mproberts/a-discussion-about-the-breaking-of-the-internet-3d4d2a83aa4d https://medium.com/@mproberts/a-discussion-about-the-breakin...
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  NPM supplied the definition of harassment. The problem is Bob's second email: >We don’t mean to be a dick about it, but it’s a registered Trademark in most countries around the world and if you actually release an open source project called kik, our trademark lawyers are going to be banging on your door and taking down your accounts and stuff like that — and we’d have no choice but to do all that because you have to enforce trademarks or you lose them. Bob was using inappropriate vulgarities and further threatened non-physical harm against Azer's "accounts" (and other "stuff like that"), in addition to threatening to send people to Azer's physical location ("stalking", "following", and, "deliberate intimidation" are also considered harassment under the Code of Conduct).
  - laughinghan 11y ago
    I may be stepping into hot water here, but I agree with grandparent and NPM that it wasn't harassment. Consider the following situation, which I hope we can all agree wouldn't be bad behavior (on the threatener's part), but would be "harassment" by the same argument you're using here: Alice writes proprietary code for a living. Monsanto somehow (she has difficulty proving it was illegal) obtains her (non-open-source) code and publishes it as open source on NPM under their own name. Alice asks Monsanto to take it down, threatening to sue them. She also asks NPM to take it down, who complies. Should NPM have sided with Monsanto because Alice sent them an email that contained a threat? No, she had a legal right to make that threat! In the email exchange between Bob and Azer, the vulgarity was referring to Bob himself, not Azer, and the threats were ones Bob had a legal right to make—a legal obligation, even, in some sense ("you have to enforce trademarks or you lose them" is universal in intellectual property jurisdictions, at least according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Maintaining_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Maintaining_rights ). > Edit2: Wow, hit a nerve here. > Edit to Steve (rate limited): [...] Hmmm, whose nerve was hit? I hate corporations as much as the next indie open source developer, but they're not the bad guy in every corporation vs open source developer story. Sometimes the open source developer legitimately infringed on a right that people in the corporation worked hard to earn.
    - jsprogrammer 11y ago
      >Should NPM have sided with Monsanto because Alice sent them an email that contained a threat? NPM should side with the first to register until told to do so by a court. NPM just sides with whatever Trademark sends them emails containing threats? The NPM Code of Conduct also states, >There is never a good reason to be rude over package name disputes. Why is Bob informing Azer that he and kik Interactive are dicks? >Any spamming, trolling, flaming, baiting, or other attention-stealing behavior is not welcome, and will not be tolerated. About 8 minutes and 10 minutes after Azer asks Bob to stop email him, Bob fires back two more unsolicited emails. kik has already decided that they don't even want the `kik` package name, so, Bob is even trolling at this point (just wants to squat a package name). On top of all that, Bob never even responds to Azer's response to Bob's offer of compensation. Bait-and-switch much, Bob? >Hmmm, whose nerve was hit? HN won't publish the downmod feed, so I don't know, but the post shot to -2, with no responses, pretty quickly.

alainv 11y ago

Harassed? Really? The undisputed transcript[0] doesn't really support that view, in my opinion. [0] https://medium.com/@mproberts/a-discussion-about-the-breaking-of-the-internet-3d4d2a83aa4d https://medium.com/@mproberts/a-discussion-about-the-breakin...

jsprogrammer 11y ago
NPM supplied the definition of harassment. The problem is Bob's second email: >We don’t mean to be a dick about it, but it’s a registered Trademark in most countries around the world and if you actually release an open source project called kik, our trademark lawyers are going to be banging on your door and taking down your accounts and stuff like that — and we’d have no choice but to do all that because you have to enforce trademarks or you lose them. Bob was using inappropriate vulgarities and further threatened non-physical harm against Azer's "accounts" (and other "stuff like that"), in addition to threatening to send people to Azer's physical location ("stalking", "following", and, "deliberate intimidation" are also considered harassment under the Code of Conduct).
- laughinghan 11y ago
  I may be stepping into hot water here, but I agree with grandparent and NPM that it wasn't harassment. Consider the following situation, which I hope we can all agree wouldn't be bad behavior (on the threatener's part), but would be "harassment" by the same argument you're using here: Alice writes proprietary code for a living. Monsanto somehow (she has difficulty proving it was illegal) obtains her (non-open-source) code and publishes it as open source on NPM under their own name. Alice asks Monsanto to take it down, threatening to sue them. She also asks NPM to take it down, who complies. Should NPM have sided with Monsanto because Alice sent them an email that contained a threat? No, she had a legal right to make that threat! In the email exchange between Bob and Azer, the vulgarity was referring to Bob himself, not Azer, and the threats were ones Bob had a legal right to make—a legal obligation, even, in some sense ("you have to enforce trademarks or you lose them" is universal in intellectual property jurisdictions, at least according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Maintaining_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Maintaining_rights ). > Edit2: Wow, hit a nerve here. > Edit to Steve (rate limited): [...] Hmmm, whose nerve was hit? I hate corporations as much as the next indie open source developer, but they're not the bad guy in every corporation vs open source developer story. Sometimes the open source developer legitimately infringed on a right that people in the corporation worked hard to earn.
  - jsprogrammer 11y ago
    >Should NPM have sided with Monsanto because Alice sent them an email that contained a threat? NPM should side with the first to register until told to do so by a court. NPM just sides with whatever Trademark sends them emails containing threats? The NPM Code of Conduct also states, >There is never a good reason to be rude over package name disputes. Why is Bob informing Azer that he and kik Interactive are dicks? >Any spamming, trolling, flaming, baiting, or other attention-stealing behavior is not welcome, and will not be tolerated. About 8 minutes and 10 minutes after Azer asks Bob to stop email him, Bob fires back two more unsolicited emails. kik has already decided that they don't even want the `kik` package name, so, Bob is even trolling at this point (just wants to squat a package name). On top of all that, Bob never even responds to Azer's response to Bob's offer of compensation. Bait-and-switch much, Bob? >Hmmm, whose nerve was hit? HN won't publish the downmod feed, so I don't know, but the post shot to -2, with no responses, pretty quickly.