8 ms·

Response to conversations about me

75 points by velmu 10y ago

sgilly 10y ago
I wonder how often this happens. Being into BDSM myself, even though I'm fairly cautious (no face photos on Fetlife, etc.) I'd always like to think my professional community would be relatively open-minded about this thing if it came to someone wanting to blackmail me. This piece has made me wonder whether I'm wrong.
- thehardsphere 10y ago
  It's not right to blackmail somebody. But the reason he was blackmailed probably had absolutely nothing to do with BDSM and everything to do with something related to Drupal or some other area where he had a dispute with someone else. BDSM was probably just a prejudice of convience, assuming the story is exactly how it is presented. So, if would be more concerned about not making people want to blackmail you, than about the particulars of how accepting people will be od what you could be blackmailed with.
  - watwut 10y ago
    "So, if would be more concerned about not making people want to blackmail you, than about the particulars of how accepting people will be od what you could be blackmailed with." That might be career limiting if he is ambitious. If he is ambitious and has competitors willing to hack ethics, then particulars on what happens when they cease the info are relevant.
    - thehardsphere 10y ago
      The best defense against people "hacking ethics" is to act ethically yourself always. And by that, I don't mean conforming to heteronormativity, I mean not needlessly pissing people off as you climb the ladder. Even if you have to piss someone off to get the job done, you should know that "ethics hackers" could exist and adjust your work conduct accordingly.
      - klibertp 10y ago
        You posted several comments like this in this thread and I'm getting curious. Basically, what you mean to say is that Larry Garfield is an asshole (I apologize if I'm guessing your intentions wrong). While you claim to know him, I don't, but I read a few comments from other people, who apparently regard him "a model community member". Could you share some details on why do you think he's an asshole, who almost surely did do something bad?
        thehardsphere 10y ago
        > Basically, what you mean to say is that Larry Garfield is an asshole I wouldn't disagree with this statement. > Could you share some details... Sure. Larry was a very productive and highly valued contributor in the community in which I knew him also. He was also simultaneously an ambitious jerk who sought high status for himself, engaged in a lot of manipulative, bullying behavior to keep that status once he attained it, and sought to change the customs of our community to permanently enshrine himself in a highly privileged position. This created a rather complex dynamic where members of our community either thought that he was a "model community member" or an "asshole" depending on what they happened to notice him doing. Eventually there came a time where his positive contributions outweighed the negative ones, and decisions were made to relieve him of certain responsibilities. Not a secret star chamber thing like with the Drupal project; it was really more of a "well, you haven't really done anything for the past 5 years because all your time is spent on Drupal, so you should really step aside now for someone else to do this work that we really need done." When that news was delivered to him, he engaged in this sort of behavior that he's doing now; sharing publicly details of the decision in a misleading way, in order to gain immediate public sympathy and hide the fact that he was asked to leave his high-status position (not our whole community) because he wasn't meeting the obligations that he committed himself to. He got away with this for a little while because the people who dismissed him decided to let him have a face-saving exit because of his valuable past contributions, but eventually everyone heard the story through the gossip chain years later. So, that's why I think he did do something bad which we don't know about; he's exhibiting the same pattern of deliberately misleading behavior when he did something not-even-bad. Either he's trying to flip Dries et al through public pressure, or he's trying to save his career by painting himself as a victim (he probably still is a victim, even if he's an asshole who did something bad; blackmail is always wrong). He's made a bet that Dries et al are not going to spill the beans, so he's taking control of the narrative for his own advantage. I will say one nice thing about Larry though: I have never heard any woman ever complain that he acted inappropriately towards them in any way related to their gender while he was in our community.
- watwut 10y ago
  Good news: probably don't happen often, cause we don't hear about it often. Bad news: It takes just a few less open minded people to harm someone. Even if majority would be privately open minded, would they be willing to openly publicly defend bdsm? It is something icky to both radical left liberal feminist and christian conservative sides. And even theoretically open minded people can turn out to have bias or prejudice once they are in real situation. Quite honestly, tech myths about themselves overstate how open or tolerant or awesome overall community is. While some sub-communities are pretty open, others strongly conservative - emphasis on strongly. For that matter, radfem could be danger to you too. So, I guess it would be a good idea to keep that info away of your profile.
theossuary 10y ago
And the response from Dries, the man who made the decision to ban Garfield from the Drupal project: http://buytaert.net/living-our-values http://buytaert.net/living-our-values He seems to allude that not all the facts are out, so it's hard to tell if this decision was a knee jerk reaction or a reasonable response.
- ar-jan 10y ago
  No, this is Larry's response to Dries, the DA and others (following his first post https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing).
- zokier 10y ago
  No matter what the non-disclosed information might be, doing something this major without giving the accused a fair chance of defending himself seems very bad form. Considering that the accused here claims that he doesn't know even what he is being accused of, either he is blatantly lying or he has been severely mistreated.
  - thehardsphere 10y ago
    Those aren't mutually exclusive.
  - peterwwillis 10y ago
    It's clear from Dries' post that he was kicked out purely for his views. It's equivalent to when Mozilla kicked out their founder for supporting an anti-gay marriage campaign. You can't defend yourself out of it, they simply don't like who he is.
    - angry_octet 10y ago
      Maybe the Mozilla board was completely happy with his choice until it became public, and meant that his role would compromise fundraising and other interaction expected of a CEO. For this guy that reason doesn't apply, and he doesn't have any supervisory responsibility. I can't see why on the facts available that this would have happened, and I can't be help think there is something more.
slitaz 10y ago
I have not been involved in Drupal and do not know this Larry person. tldr; He was involved in a subculture called Gorean, and has been a master in Master/Slave relationships. One of his Slaves was a severely autistic woman. He talks about BSDM being ok between consenting individuals, etc.
- thehardsphere 10y ago
  I do know this Larry person, but outside of the Drupal project and alternative lifestyle subcultures. I would not be surprised at all if everything he wrote is absolutely true, but key details are omitted.
  - munchbunny 10y ago
    Do you mean that you wouldn't be surprised if the omitted details drastically change the picture from "Larry did nothing wrong" to "there's some pretty shady stuff"?
    - thehardsphere 10y ago
      Yes, that's what I mean exactly. The "pretty shady stuff" need not even be sexual, if the post by Dries is accurate.
klibertp 10y ago
The order of reading seems to be like this: https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing http://buytaert.net/living-our-values http://buytaert.net/living-our-values https://www.reddit.com/r/drupal/comments/60y9mq/larry_garfield_on_harassment_in_the_drupal_project/ https://www.reddit.com/r/drupal/comments/60y9mq/larry_garfie... https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-part-2 https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-part-2
protomyth 10y ago
I'm a fairly conservative guy, but reading this I cannot help but think Dries is the problem. So, Larry has a kink that is consensual that has a community and is not against the law. I'm at a loss if he hasn't harmed anyone and done anything in his speeches at the various Cons why this is a problem. Which brings us to: While I will not share the evidence that I believe would validate the decision that I made for reasons of liability and confidentiality Is pretty much the new "I don't have to justify my decision, it is right, and you don't get to argue" phrasing. You get to kick them out, and everyone gets to use their imagination about what further nastiness occurred. Also, they cannot fight back effectively.
- coreyp_1 10y ago
  Dries has always been a "benevolent dictator" http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/375567/dries_buytaert_talks_drupal_leadership_open_source/ http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/375567/dries_buytaer.... I feel that your observation is correct, with one caveat: Several people kept pushing on this against Larry. They, too, are the problem. Blackmail is NEVER acceptable.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- walshemj 10y ago
  doesn't "for reasons of liability" imply that he/she knows that it violates natural justice and /or custom and practice
  - protomyth 10y ago
    I'm sorry I'm not quite following could you explain a bit what you mean?
    - girvo 10y ago
      I think they mean that if Dries says the real reason, it will be seen as discrimination and thus Dries might be liable, perhaps?
thesmallestcat 10y ago
Hopefully this thread is not killed like the previous one. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13960859 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13960859
elevensies 10y ago
I personally have no interest in PHP or BDSM but I think really everyone who wants to participate in Open Source Software in 2017 should be paying attention to this along with other instances where people have been kicked/banned from projects alongside public accusations against them. Especially if you have been participating in online communities for a while, your conversations have probably been archived and are open to scrutiny based moral standards that are constantly changing, both in terms of who is applying them to the project, and changes in the views of each individual. And when I say your conversations, I mean both conversations that you've held in public-ish settings and also conversations that you believed to be private that could be forwarded or screenshot without your knowledge or consent. Or conversations where you believed you were pseudo-anonymous where your identity was later reveled. Also, given international participation of many projects, the moral inquisitors may hold views that are significantly different than anyone you've ever met or interacted with in a non-technical setting. I think the TV show Black Mirror should be shown in high schools as an educational video.
- thesmallestcat 10y ago
  This is why I stopped helping/participating in ##javascript on Freenode, and I don't think I'm alone. [Nicks of two enthusiastic mods redacted] made it clear (in channel as well as in private /msg) that any perceived troublemaking, if it could be distorted to break a CoC rule, would result in the user being blacklisted at most major JavaScript events. Who would accept that career risk? Having your name on such a list would be devastating. Increasingly, small groups of SJW-types (sorry, I can't think of a better description right now) are controlling mainstream open source communities. It seems these days more and more like if you want to actively participate in open source, you either have to fit a narrow definition of a Good Person, or else be a cold oracle of code, producing nothing but fact.
- smoyer 10y ago
  "I personally have no interest in PHP or BDSM" ... ouch! I have to say that my impression of "Larry" (who I've never heard of before) is pretty bad after reading his essay. I think he ended up saying something to offend everyone - I've known plenty of people like him. The upshot is that you don't have to agree with everyone (or anyone) but you can still be civil. Good luck Larry.
klibertp 10y ago
There's one aspect of all this I'd like to address. According to Dries, the reason for banning Larry is this: In the end, I fundamentally believe that all people are created equally. This belief has shaped the values that the Drupal project has held since it's early days. I cannot in good faith support someone who actively promotes a philosophy that is contrary to this. The Gorean philosophy promoted by Larry is based on the principle that women are evolutionarily predisposed to serve men and that the natural order is for men to dominate and lead. This sounds horrible, but I think it's just a misunderstanding. I believe that what Dries (and some commenters, like tptacek[1][2]) misses here is a very fundamental fact: BDSM is just a game, and "Gor" is just a series of science-fantasy novels. In other words, even if Larry did say somewhere that "females are subhuman" it's not enough to conclude that this is what he believes in, even less that he would act on these beliefs. It may look pretty bad - whatever he said or wrote[5], we don't know[3] - when taken out of context, but without solid evidence to the contrary I assume the context here is BDSM. Saying things like these is expected and normal within the bounds of the scene and in conversations about it[6]. Again: default assumption when it comes to BDSM is that it's an act, a game played between consenting adults. Dries seems to be convinced that there is enough evidence[4] to say that this assumption does not apply here. As an outsider, I find it hard to believe him without seeing the evidence myself. In my experience, it's more often the case that the shocked observers don't know (or don't want to know) the convention and interpret what they see out of context. To summarize: without further evidence and based on the knowledge of what BDSM is about I think it's safer to assume that someone did take offense (contrary to Dries claim[7]) to something he didn't fully understand, which resulted in current situation. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13961655 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13961655 [2] Since the beliefs that we're talking about could be broadly and probably inaccurately but by how much I don't know described as "females are subhuman," it's the perspective of the Drupal members who did the ousting that those beliefs matter very much to the project. [3] it is not for me to share any of the confidential information that I've received, [4] However, I can tell you that those who have reviewed Larry's writing, including me, suffered from varying degrees of shock and concern. [5] There is no mention anywhere about actually doing something wrong. [6] tptacek writes that "[...] the claim here [...] is that proselytizing was in fact an issue." - but that would only be a problem had Larry tried to convince someone that "females are subhuman", and again, given that the only context given is "BDSM" I assume he didn't. He may have said something which could be interpreted as such, but that's not really the same thing as consciously "promoting" "the philosophy." [7] I also don't take any offense to the role-playing activities or sexual preferences of Larry's alternative lifestyle.

75 points by velmu 10y ago

I wonder how often this happens. Being into BDSM myself, even though I'm fairly cautious (no face photos on Fetlife, etc.) I'd always like to think my professional community would be relatively open-minded about this thing if it came to someone wanting to blackmail me. This piece has made me wonder whether I'm wrong.

thehardsphere 10y ago
It's not right to blackmail somebody. But the reason he was blackmailed probably had absolutely nothing to do with BDSM and everything to do with something related to Drupal or some other area where he had a dispute with someone else. BDSM was probably just a prejudice of convience, assuming the story is exactly how it is presented. So, if would be more concerned about not making people want to blackmail you, than about the particulars of how accepting people will be od what you could be blackmailed with.
- watwut 10y ago
  "So, if would be more concerned about not making people want to blackmail you, than about the particulars of how accepting people will be od what you could be blackmailed with." That might be career limiting if he is ambitious. If he is ambitious and has competitors willing to hack ethics, then particulars on what happens when they cease the info are relevant.
  - thehardsphere 10y ago
    The best defense against people "hacking ethics" is to act ethically yourself always. And by that, I don't mean conforming to heteronormativity, I mean not needlessly pissing people off as you climb the ladder. Even if you have to piss someone off to get the job done, you should know that "ethics hackers" could exist and adjust your work conduct accordingly.
    - klibertp 10y ago
      You posted several comments like this in this thread and I'm getting curious. Basically, what you mean to say is that Larry Garfield is an asshole (I apologize if I'm guessing your intentions wrong). While you claim to know him, I don't, but I read a few comments from other people, who apparently regard him "a model community member". Could you share some details on why do you think he's an asshole, who almost surely did do something bad?
      - thehardsphere 10y ago
        > Basically, what you mean to say is that Larry Garfield is an asshole I wouldn't disagree with this statement. > Could you share some details... Sure. Larry was a very productive and highly valued contributor in the community in which I knew him also. He was also simultaneously an ambitious jerk who sought high status for himself, engaged in a lot of manipulative, bullying behavior to keep that status once he attained it, and sought to change the customs of our community to permanently enshrine himself in a highly privileged position. This created a rather complex dynamic where members of our community either thought that he was a "model community member" or an "asshole" depending on what they happened to notice him doing. Eventually there came a time where his positive contributions outweighed the negative ones, and decisions were made to relieve him of certain responsibilities. Not a secret star chamber thing like with the Drupal project; it was really more of a "well, you haven't really done anything for the past 5 years because all your time is spent on Drupal, so you should really step aside now for someone else to do this work that we really need done." When that news was delivered to him, he engaged in this sort of behavior that he's doing now; sharing publicly details of the decision in a misleading way, in order to gain immediate public sympathy and hide the fact that he was asked to leave his high-status position (not our whole community) because he wasn't meeting the obligations that he committed himself to. He got away with this for a little while because the people who dismissed him decided to let him have a face-saving exit because of his valuable past contributions, but eventually everyone heard the story through the gossip chain years later. So, that's why I think he did do something bad which we don't know about; he's exhibiting the same pattern of deliberately misleading behavior when he did something not-even-bad. Either he's trying to flip Dries et al through public pressure, or he's trying to save his career by painting himself as a victim (he probably still is a victim, even if he's an asshole who did something bad; blackmail is always wrong). He's made a bet that Dries et al are not going to spill the beans, so he's taking control of the narrative for his own advantage. I will say one nice thing about Larry though: I have never heard any woman ever complain that he acted inappropriately towards them in any way related to their gender while he was in our community.
watwut 10y ago
Good news: probably don't happen often, cause we don't hear about it often. Bad news: It takes just a few less open minded people to harm someone. Even if majority would be privately open minded, would they be willing to openly publicly defend bdsm? It is something icky to both radical left liberal feminist and christian conservative sides. And even theoretically open minded people can turn out to have bias or prejudice once they are in real situation. Quite honestly, tech myths about themselves overstate how open or tolerant or awesome overall community is. While some sub-communities are pretty open, others strongly conservative - emphasis on strongly. For that matter, radfem could be danger to you too. So, I guess it would be a good idea to keep that info away of your profile.

theossuary 10y ago

And the response from Dries, the man who made the decision to ban Garfield from the Drupal project: http://buytaert.net/living-our-values http://buytaert.net/living-our-values He seems to allude that not all the facts are out, so it's hard to tell if this decision was a knee jerk reaction or a reasonable response.

ar-jan 10y ago
No, this is Larry's response to Dries, the DA and others (following his first post https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing).
zokier 10y ago
No matter what the non-disclosed information might be, doing something this major without giving the accused a fair chance of defending himself seems very bad form. Considering that the accused here claims that he doesn't know even what he is being accused of, either he is blatantly lying or he has been severely mistreated.
- thehardsphere 10y ago
  Those aren't mutually exclusive.
- peterwwillis 10y ago
  It's clear from Dries' post that he was kicked out purely for his views. It's equivalent to when Mozilla kicked out their founder for supporting an anti-gay marriage campaign. You can't defend yourself out of it, they simply don't like who he is.
  - angry_octet 10y ago
    Maybe the Mozilla board was completely happy with his choice until it became public, and meant that his role would compromise fundraising and other interaction expected of a CEO. For this guy that reason doesn't apply, and he doesn't have any supervisory responsibility. I can't see why on the facts available that this would have happened, and I can't be help think there is something more.

slitaz 10y ago

I have not been involved in Drupal and do not know this Larry person. tldr; He was involved in a subculture called Gorean, and has been a master in Master/Slave relationships. One of his Slaves was a severely autistic woman. He talks about BSDM being ok between consenting individuals, etc.

thehardsphere 10y ago
I do know this Larry person, but outside of the Drupal project and alternative lifestyle subcultures. I would not be surprised at all if everything he wrote is absolutely true, but key details are omitted.
- munchbunny 10y ago
  Do you mean that you wouldn't be surprised if the omitted details drastically change the picture from "Larry did nothing wrong" to "there's some pretty shady stuff"?
  - thehardsphere 10y ago
    Yes, that's what I mean exactly. The "pretty shady stuff" need not even be sexual, if the post by Dries is accurate.

klibertp 10y ago

The order of reading seems to be like this: https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing http://buytaert.net/living-our-values http://buytaert.net/living-our-values https://www.reddit.com/r/drupal/comments/60y9mq/larry_garfield_on_harassment_in_the_drupal_project/ https://www.reddit.com/r/drupal/comments/60y9mq/larry_garfie... https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-part-2 https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-part-2

protomyth 10y ago

I'm a fairly conservative guy, but reading this I cannot help but think Dries is the problem. So, Larry has a kink that is consensual that has a community and is not against the law. I'm at a loss if he hasn't harmed anyone and done anything in his speeches at the various Cons why this is a problem. Which brings us to: While I will not share the evidence that I believe would validate the decision that I made for reasons of liability and confidentiality Is pretty much the new "I don't have to justify my decision, it is right, and you don't get to argue" phrasing. You get to kick them out, and everyone gets to use their imagination about what further nastiness occurred. Also, they cannot fight back effectively.

coreyp_1 10y ago
Dries has always been a "benevolent dictator" http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/375567/dries_buytaert_talks_drupal_leadership_open_source/ http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/375567/dries_buytaer.... I feel that your observation is correct, with one caveat: Several people kept pushing on this against Larry. They, too, are the problem. Blackmail is NEVER acceptable.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
walshemj 10y ago
doesn't "for reasons of liability" imply that he/she knows that it violates natural justice and /or custom and practice
- protomyth 10y ago
  I'm sorry I'm not quite following could you explain a bit what you mean?
  - girvo 10y ago
    I think they mean that if Dries says the real reason, it will be seen as discrimination and thus Dries might be liable, perhaps?

thesmallestcat 10y ago

Hopefully this thread is not killed like the previous one. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13960859 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13960859

elevensies 10y ago

I personally have no interest in PHP or BDSM but I think really everyone who wants to participate in Open Source Software in 2017 should be paying attention to this along with other instances where people have been kicked/banned from projects alongside public accusations against them. Especially if you have been participating in online communities for a while, your conversations have probably been archived and are open to scrutiny based moral standards that are constantly changing, both in terms of who is applying them to the project, and changes in the views of each individual. And when I say your conversations, I mean both conversations that you've held in public-ish settings and also conversations that you believed to be private that could be forwarded or screenshot without your knowledge or consent. Or conversations where you believed you were pseudo-anonymous where your identity was later reveled. Also, given international participation of many projects, the moral inquisitors may hold views that are significantly different than anyone you've ever met or interacted with in a non-technical setting. I think the TV show Black Mirror should be shown in high schools as an educational video.

thesmallestcat 10y ago
This is why I stopped helping/participating in ##javascript on Freenode, and I don't think I'm alone. [Nicks of two enthusiastic mods redacted] made it clear (in channel as well as in private /msg) that any perceived troublemaking, if it could be distorted to break a CoC rule, would result in the user being blacklisted at most major JavaScript events. Who would accept that career risk? Having your name on such a list would be devastating. Increasingly, small groups of SJW-types (sorry, I can't think of a better description right now) are controlling mainstream open source communities. It seems these days more and more like if you want to actively participate in open source, you either have to fit a narrow definition of a Good Person, or else be a cold oracle of code, producing nothing but fact.
smoyer 10y ago
"I personally have no interest in PHP or BDSM" ... ouch! I have to say that my impression of "Larry" (who I've never heard of before) is pretty bad after reading his essay. I think he ended up saying something to offend everyone - I've known plenty of people like him. The upshot is that you don't have to agree with everyone (or anyone) but you can still be civil. Good luck Larry.

klibertp 10y ago

There's one aspect of all this I'd like to address. According to Dries, the reason for banning Larry is this: In the end, I fundamentally believe that all people are created equally. This belief has shaped the values that the Drupal project has held since it's early days. I cannot in good faith support someone who actively promotes a philosophy that is contrary to this. The Gorean philosophy promoted by Larry is based on the principle that women are evolutionarily predisposed to serve men and that the natural order is for men to dominate and lead. This sounds horrible, but I think it's just a misunderstanding. I believe that what Dries (and some commenters, like tptacek[1][2]) misses here is a very fundamental fact: BDSM is just a game, and "Gor" is just a series of science-fantasy novels. In other words, even if Larry did say somewhere that "females are subhuman" it's not enough to conclude that this is what he believes in, even less that he would act on these beliefs. It may look pretty bad - whatever he said or wrote[5], we don't know[3] - when taken out of context, but without solid evidence to the contrary I assume the context here is BDSM. Saying things like these is expected and normal within the bounds of the scene and in conversations about it[6]. Again: default assumption when it comes to BDSM is that it's an act, a game played between consenting adults. Dries seems to be convinced that there is enough evidence[4] to say that this assumption does not apply here. As an outsider, I find it hard to believe him without seeing the evidence myself. In my experience, it's more often the case that the shocked observers don't know (or don't want to know) the convention and interpret what they see out of context. To summarize: without further evidence and based on the knowledge of what BDSM is about I think it's safer to assume that someone did take offense (contrary to Dries claim[7]) to something he didn't fully understand, which resulted in current situation. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13961655 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13961655 [2] Since the beliefs that we're talking about could be broadly and probably inaccurately but by how much I don't know described as "females are subhuman," it's the perspective of the Drupal members who did the ousting that those beliefs matter very much to the project. [3] it is not for me to share any of the confidential information that I've received, [4] However, I can tell you that those who have reviewed Larry's writing, including me, suffered from varying degrees of shock and concern. [5] There is no mention anywhere about actually doing something wrong. [6] tptacek writes that "[...] the claim here [...] is that proselytizing was in fact an issue." - but that would only be a problem had Larry tried to convince someone that "females are subhuman", and again, given that the only context given is "BDSM" I assume he didn't. He may have said something which could be interpreted as such, but that's not really the same thing as consciously "promoting" "the philosophy." [7] I also don't take any offense to the role-playing activities or sexual preferences of Larry's alternative lifestyle.