7 ms·

worth noting, at the end of christine's update mentioned above: "I do not plan to make any future update posts about the V programming language in the future.

by xearl 6y ago

worth noting, at the end of christine's update mentioned above: "I do not plan to make any future update posts about the V programming language in the future. The V community is something I would really rather not be associated with. This is an edited-down version of the post that was released last week (2020 M06 17). "As of the time of writing this note to the end of this post and as far as I am aware, I am banned from being able to contribute to the V language in any form. I am therefore forced to consider that the V project will respond to criticism of their language with bans. This subjective view of reality may not be accurate to what others see." for anyone considering getting involved, read christine's three articles on the topic first: https://christine.website/blog/series/v https://christine.website/blog/series/v

lightgreen 6y ago
Would be helpful is Christine gave some examples to threads and discussions. Without any details, either side can be blamed for the ban. Also, would be good to know what are the contributions. I have looked at the github page of V contributers https://github.com/vlang/v/graphs/contributors https://github.com/vlang/v/graphs/contributors and have not find Chrinstine there.
- xena 6y ago
  I don't know if I have any copies of it anymore, because it was deleted from the V Discord. Once they found out I was the author of that post everything was deleted and I was banned from the Discord, Telegram and GitHub.
  - lightgreen 6y ago
    > I was banned from the ... GitHub Even if they banned you from GitHub, they did not rewrite git history, I hope? I have not found any commits authored by you in the V repository: git log | grep Author: | egrep -i '(christ|xe)' | sort | uniq 116 Author: Alexey <alex.esprit@gmail.com> 1 Author: Alexey Lustin <allustin@users.noreply.github.com> 1 Author: Bryan Christopher Johnson <bryanchristopherjohnson@gmail.com> 1 Author: Chris <chris@suletuxe.de> 1 Author: XeGrox <52340924+XeGrox@users.noreply.github.com>
    - xena 6y ago
      I was banned before I could contribute to the repo.
      - lightgreen 6y ago
        That might explain the ban. People who create something usually don't like people who give unsolited advice but don't contribute manpower. There's a saying: the best way to complain is to make things.
        phaemon 6y ago
        When given criticism, banning the critic from ever contributing is a ludicrously adolescent response. I'm going to guess (at least I hope!) that you're inexperienced in the professional world. Well, in the adult world you will face criticism for what you produce constantly. Some of that criticism will be fair and you'll be able to act on it - you can improve what you've done. Some will be fair but you can't act on it - you can't change it in time or on budget and that's not your fault. And some will be completely unfair - it's simply not accurate. You need to develop a mature response to all these scenarios. But sticking your fingers in your ears and going, "lalala I can't hear you" is not one of them.
        lightgreen 6y ago
        > When given criticism, banning the critic from ever contributing is a ludicrously adolescent response. According to this: https://christine.website/blog/series/v https://christine.website/blog/series/v it was a year between first post and the last. It was more than enough time to make at least some contributions. This timeline convinces me that Christine did not intend to contribute at all. > Well, in the adult world you will face criticism for what you produce constantly. Criticism is natural. Banning people who don't help, but distract and demotivate, is also natural. > You need to develop a mature response to all these scenarios. It's not that simple. Too much criticism can kill will even in strongest people. Sometimes the best response to non-constructive criticism is to just ban, and focus on what's important.
  - lightgreen 6y ago
    OK, another thread have pointers. This is your post: https://web.archive.org/web/20191223200601/https://christine.website/blog/OVE-20190623-0001 https://web.archive.org/web/20191223200601/https://christine... This looks like a childish attempt to disrupt the work of the project members with no benefit to anybody at all. And you pretended you don't know why you were banned.
    - yellowapple 6y ago
      I'm failing to see how that post is a "childish attempt" at anything. Offering a language playground to the general public and not sufficiently preventing that playground from compromising the very server on which it runs is a pretty glaring problem. At worst, you might criticize her for publishing that post immediately after discovering the exploit (instead of the more "polite" approach of allowing someone to patch it first, within a reasonable deadline), but that's pretty minor in comparison to, you know, V's playground being vulnerable to major security issues. In any case, banning people from contributing to a project entirely merely because they pointed out glaring security issues is considerably more childish than the actual pointing out of security issues, no matter how distastefully the latter might've been done (and again, aside from the lack of a responsible disclosure period, I ain't seeing anything particularly glaring in that post).
      - lightgreen 6y ago
        > Offering a language playground to the general public and not sufficiently preventing that playground from compromising the very server on which it runs is a pretty glaring problem How it is a problem for anyone except project owners? Project owners were notified. There was no need to disclose it publicly. I say it's childish. > banning people from contributing to a project entirely merely because they pointed out glaring security issues Banning them because they: * don't do any good (in particular, zero code contributions in a year) * disrupt the work by telling the internet how to break their service * call the project "vaporware" I'd call it is enough reasons to ban them. And some personal argument. I have a service I'm running, for the random people in the internet. I implemented it long time ago, and I spend like 10 minutes a year supporting it. It is not protected seriously, because I don't have enough time to do so. I think any kid with basic knowledge of how internet works, can easily break it, or even can DOS it causing me to pay big bucks to the hoster for the consumed CPU. And I have full-time job. So if some person would notify me about the vulnerability, and give me one (!) day to fix it, I would probably give up what ever I'm doing, my work, my personal plans, and fix the issue, but I would be very unhappy about it, and I will probably be angry at that person, and I'll try to avoid that person like fire.

by xearl 6y ago

lightgreen 6y ago

Would be helpful is Christine gave some examples to threads and discussions. Without any details, either side can be blamed for the ban. Also, would be good to know what are the contributions. I have looked at the github page of V contributers https://github.com/vlang/v/graphs/contributors https://github.com/vlang/v/graphs/contributors and have not find Chrinstine there.

xena 6y ago
I don't know if I have any copies of it anymore, because it was deleted from the V Discord. Once they found out I was the author of that post everything was deleted and I was banned from the Discord, Telegram and GitHub.
- lightgreen 6y ago
  > I was banned from the ... GitHub Even if they banned you from GitHub, they did not rewrite git history, I hope? I have not found any commits authored by you in the V repository: git log | grep Author: | egrep -i '(christ|xe)' | sort | uniq 116 Author: Alexey <alex.esprit@gmail.com> 1 Author: Alexey Lustin <allustin@users.noreply.github.com> 1 Author: Bryan Christopher Johnson <bryanchristopherjohnson@gmail.com> 1 Author: Chris <chris@suletuxe.de> 1 Author: XeGrox <52340924+XeGrox@users.noreply.github.com>
  - xena 6y ago
    I was banned before I could contribute to the repo.
    - lightgreen 6y ago
      That might explain the ban. People who create something usually don't like people who give unsolited advice but don't contribute manpower. There's a saying: the best way to complain is to make things.
      - phaemon 6y ago
        When given criticism, banning the critic from ever contributing is a ludicrously adolescent response. I'm going to guess (at least I hope!) that you're inexperienced in the professional world. Well, in the adult world you will face criticism for what you produce constantly. Some of that criticism will be fair and you'll be able to act on it - you can improve what you've done. Some will be fair but you can't act on it - you can't change it in time or on budget and that's not your fault. And some will be completely unfair - it's simply not accurate. You need to develop a mature response to all these scenarios. But sticking your fingers in your ears and going, "lalala I can't hear you" is not one of them.
        lightgreen 6y ago
        > When given criticism, banning the critic from ever contributing is a ludicrously adolescent response. According to this: https://christine.website/blog/series/v https://christine.website/blog/series/v it was a year between first post and the last. It was more than enough time to make at least some contributions. This timeline convinces me that Christine did not intend to contribute at all. > Well, in the adult world you will face criticism for what you produce constantly. Criticism is natural. Banning people who don't help, but distract and demotivate, is also natural. > You need to develop a mature response to all these scenarios. It's not that simple. Too much criticism can kill will even in strongest people. Sometimes the best response to non-constructive criticism is to just ban, and focus on what's important.
- lightgreen 6y ago
  OK, another thread have pointers. This is your post: https://web.archive.org/web/20191223200601/https://christine.website/blog/OVE-20190623-0001 https://web.archive.org/web/20191223200601/https://christine... This looks like a childish attempt to disrupt the work of the project members with no benefit to anybody at all. And you pretended you don't know why you were banned.
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    I'm failing to see how that post is a "childish attempt" at anything. Offering a language playground to the general public and not sufficiently preventing that playground from compromising the very server on which it runs is a pretty glaring problem. At worst, you might criticize her for publishing that post immediately after discovering the exploit (instead of the more "polite" approach of allowing someone to patch it first, within a reasonable deadline), but that's pretty minor in comparison to, you know, V's playground being vulnerable to major security issues. In any case, banning people from contributing to a project entirely merely because they pointed out glaring security issues is considerably more childish than the actual pointing out of security issues, no matter how distastefully the latter might've been done (and again, aside from the lack of a responsible disclosure period, I ain't seeing anything particularly glaring in that post).
    - lightgreen 6y ago
      > Offering a language playground to the general public and not sufficiently preventing that playground from compromising the very server on which it runs is a pretty glaring problem How it is a problem for anyone except project owners? Project owners were notified. There was no need to disclose it publicly. I say it's childish. > banning people from contributing to a project entirely merely because they pointed out glaring security issues Banning them because they: * don't do any good (in particular, zero code contributions in a year) * disrupt the work by telling the internet how to break their service * call the project "vaporware" I'd call it is enough reasons to ban them. And some personal argument. I have a service I'm running, for the random people in the internet. I implemented it long time ago, and I spend like 10 minutes a year supporting it. It is not protected seriously, because I don't have enough time to do so. I think any kid with basic knowledge of how internet works, can easily break it, or even can DOS it causing me to pay big bucks to the hoster for the consumed CPU. And I have full-time job. So if some person would notify me about the vulnerability, and give me one (!) day to fix it, I would probably give up what ever I'm doing, my work, my personal plans, and fix the issue, but I would be very unhappy about it, and I will probably be angry at that person, and I'll try to avoid that person like fire.