4 ms·
Six of them voted for no sanctions, though. And two abstained. Who lost the vote resigned, which is a way to say "we couldn't expel you by voting, now we're try
by curtisblaine 9y ago
Six of them voted for no sanctions, though. And two abstained. Who lost the vote resigned, which is a way to say "we couldn't expel you by voting, now we're trying to create as much drama as possible because we just can't accept the decision, even if voted democratically by our peers"
- fixermark 9y agoThere is such a thing as "tyranny of the majority." Since there's no back-stop against it in the node.js steering, no reason to lend credence to an organization that you no longer feel comfortable supporting by staying on its steering committe.
- root_axis 9y ago> now we're trying to create as much drama as possible because we just can't accept the decision, even if voted democratically by our peers The purpose of the vote was to determine if any action should be taken, the vote occurred and its outcome was respected. If individuals want to resign because they disagree with the outcome of the vote, they are clearly entitled to do so and it does not violate the spirit of democracy that those unsatisfied with the status-quo take a stand by moving on from the organization. They didn't trash the place or delete all the source code and ban all dissenters from the project, they simply resigned from their roles within the organization which allows it to continue unencumbered by the dissenters strongly held viewpoints. If they had voted to boot the guy and his supporters resigned to show solidarity and protest the decision, would you have been similarly critical?
- curtisblaine 9y ago> which allows it to continue unencumbered by the dissenters strongly held viewpoints. I hope it does! :)