3 ms·

"Anytime someone tries to challenge them calling out their behavior..." Where is this happening? The CoM says it can't happen on the project mailing list, or t

"Anytime someone tries to challenge them calling out their behavior..." Where is this happening? The CoM says it can't happen on the project mailing list, or the project forum, or the project issues page ... Doing it on Twitter? Not within the project and fair game.

geofft 8y ago
If a senior contributor is systematically making time to read PRs by green-skinned people but not PRs by purple-skinned people, but hasn't said out loud that they're doing so, are you allowed to say anything about it? Also, why is "fair game" a concept that applies to whether misbehavior can be challenged and not to the misbehavior itself? If the contributor tweets, "Ew, all these incompetent purples keep making trash PRs," why should that itself not be considered outside the bounds of "fair game"?
- delinka 8y ago
  "...are you allowed to say anything about it?" Of course. But away from the project. In the project, I'd say you're free to ask "has this been reviewed? why hasn't it been?" in an attempt to get things moving. If, in the project, the maintainer makes it about non-technical things, have the wherewithal to take it public and not continue polluting the the project's technical history. People are free to express their dislike of the Greens or Purples on Twitter. And they'll catch the fallout on Twitter. Why should these conversations pollute the project documentation? If the lead maintainer shows its true colors and refuses to become a decent human being, people will leave the project. If the project is truly important, someone will fork it and create a new project with a new community. Personally (and selfishly), it comes down to this: years later, when I'm looking for a solution to a problem and $SEARCH_ENGINE returns an email thread, I don't want to sift through dozens of messages about the drama between the Greens and the Purples to find exactly the single line of script that solves my problem. "Also, why is "fair game" a concept that applies..." I don't understand. Either you've misread me, or you're bringing in topics that I didn't address so I don't know what this is about.
- VonGallifrey 8y ago
  I might be missing something here, but I don't think that someone being racist grants you the right to oust them. They don't owe you their time to review your work and at the same time you don't have to contribute to a project that you think is racist or any other reason. What do you think gives you the right to demand inclusion?
  - geofft 8y ago
    Unless I am in a position of power over the project (founder, corporate sponsor, etc.), it doesn't give me the right to oust them, you're right. But that's not what I'm claiming. It gives me the right to say they're not pursuing merit.
    - asqueella 8y ago
      I wonder if you know of situations in which a project maintainer would not review/accept a patch because of the background of the patch author. It would require them to specifically search for information about the author, which I can’t imagine anyone doing. That, unlike posting something on twitter, would indeed be indecent. I’ve seen many instances of project contributors being flamed because of their “bad” behavior on twitter or elsewhere, but have not seen anyone accused not judging a specific contribution based on its merit.

geofft 8y ago

If a senior contributor is systematically making time to read PRs by green-skinned people but not PRs by purple-skinned people, but hasn't said out loud that they're doing so, are you allowed to say anything about it? Also, why is "fair game" a concept that applies to whether misbehavior can be challenged and not to the misbehavior itself? If the contributor tweets, "Ew, all these incompetent purples keep making trash PRs," why should that itself not be considered outside the bounds of "fair game"?

delinka 8y ago
"...are you allowed to say anything about it?" Of course. But away from the project. In the project, I'd say you're free to ask "has this been reviewed? why hasn't it been?" in an attempt to get things moving. If, in the project, the maintainer makes it about non-technical things, have the wherewithal to take it public and not continue polluting the the project's technical history. People are free to express their dislike of the Greens or Purples on Twitter. And they'll catch the fallout on Twitter. Why should these conversations pollute the project documentation? If the lead maintainer shows its true colors and refuses to become a decent human being, people will leave the project. If the project is truly important, someone will fork it and create a new project with a new community. Personally (and selfishly), it comes down to this: years later, when I'm looking for a solution to a problem and $SEARCH_ENGINE returns an email thread, I don't want to sift through dozens of messages about the drama between the Greens and the Purples to find exactly the single line of script that solves my problem. "Also, why is "fair game" a concept that applies..." I don't understand. Either you've misread me, or you're bringing in topics that I didn't address so I don't know what this is about.
VonGallifrey 8y ago
I might be missing something here, but I don't think that someone being racist grants you the right to oust them. They don't owe you their time to review your work and at the same time you don't have to contribute to a project that you think is racist or any other reason. What do you think gives you the right to demand inclusion?
- geofft 8y ago
  Unless I am in a position of power over the project (founder, corporate sponsor, etc.), it doesn't give me the right to oust them, you're right. But that's not what I'm claiming. It gives me the right to say they're not pursuing merit.
  - asqueella 8y ago
    I wonder if you know of situations in which a project maintainer would not review/accept a patch because of the background of the patch author. It would require them to specifically search for information about the author, which I can’t imagine anyone doing. That, unlike posting something on twitter, would indeed be indecent. I’ve seen many instances of project contributors being flamed because of their “bad” behavior on twitter or elsewhere, but have not seen anyone accused not judging a specific contribution based on its merit.