5 ms·

Ok, I'm not heavily steeped in this, but at first glance this seems like total bullshit. Note that the original complaint was both 1) that the code of conduct

by smeeth 6y ago

Ok, I'm not heavily steeped in this, but at first glance this seems like total bullshit. Note that the original complaint was both 1) that the code of conduct people were being, well, total assholes, and 2) that the complaints were so obviously ridiculous that the entire exercise seemed like it could only be a power trip for those involved. The apology addressed neither. They apologized for being unclear about what stage of the investigation they were in. No apology for laughing at Jeremy's distress, no apology for the witch hunt, etc. The grand remedy? Replace 3/4 of the people on the committee. Did I miss something here?

marcinzm 6y ago
Why would you expect people who have shown little empathy up to this point and seem to enjoy their sense of power to suddenly act different when confronted? It's a bureaucratic BS statement from people who revel in bureaucratic BS.
RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
The CoC members should all be expelled from the NumFocus community. They have done far more to make NumFocus a a non-welcoming community than just about any CoC violation.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  Another option is to just directly fund developers instead of through organizations. I tried to find the audits on the NumFOCUS website, but I wasn't able to find how much of the donations they are getting gets to the developers themselves. I would imagine, that it could be even under 50%.
sigmaprimus 6y ago
Just curious, what would You suggest as a remedy to this situation? This is an honest questions please don't get offended.
- rmrfstar 6y ago
  Honestly? They should be assigned 12 hours of reading that covers the history of due process, what it is, and why we have it.
  - sigmaprimus 6y ago
    That seems like a reasonable suggestion, with the option of resignation, I was thinking more along the lines of financial compensation.
MattGaiser 6y ago
No, but you can only expect so much self flagellation. In a day and age of "deny, deny, deny" an apology is welcome, even if it is a bit CYA.
harlanji 6y ago
At very least the action is something to point to, and maintain reputation. Almost 5 years ago a hostile employer did this to me and since then most of my huge former network built over 15+ years have stopped associating with me and are starting to assume I’m mentally ill and hung up on it, but in truth I simply can’t work anymore due to the reference check process having been compromised and former associates lacking support. I’m now forced to go through legal channels to clear my name. If I can get an acknowledgement of their mistake then life will get much easier to explain. Too bad about the content, non-apology, but I’d not undetestimate the act alone.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  Except their apology doesn't do what you're saying as it doesn't say he was innocent or that he didn't violate the CoC. It simply says they didn't fully follow their process and that if he wants to appeal the board will hear it. As I read it he is still considered guilty unless the board accepts the appeal. edit: And since he seems too emotionally exhausted by this to deal with it further there will possibly be no appeal filed and thus he will stay guilty by default.
  - harlanji 6y ago
    What I’m saying is that the statement “and they apologized” is true and very significant. It’s extremely uncommon to get that much. Picturing a job interview scenario. People are all emotion and that fragment does the job. Not picturing IRC with a bunch of invested people here, in which case yes, your point is logically valid there.
    - marcinzm 6y ago
      In my experience the people doing the interview are not at all emotional during a job interview. They're coldly cautious if anything. So an apology that isn't a full retraction won't matter since the person is still a potential risk in their eyes.
PragmaticPulp 6y ago
The apology is so vague and PR-washed that it’s nearly impossible to draw any conclusions. At this point, they won’t even acknowledge that the initial accusations were unreasonable. In fact, it appears they’ve simply transferred the investigation up a level to the board of directors so it can continue. A real apology would have acknowledged that they mishandled the situation and taken steps to resolve it as fast as possible. This feels more like an attempt to justify their actions, move the goal posts about what they did wrong, and move the investigation back behind closed doors within NumFOCUS. Please just publicly acknowledge that this should have been resolved within a day or two by absolving Jeremey of wrongdoing, and without this never ending inquisition that now involves even more and higher-ranking individuals at NumFOCUS. This is such a simple issue that never should have gone this far.

by smeeth 6y ago

marcinzm 6y ago

Why would you expect people who have shown little empathy up to this point and seem to enjoy their sense of power to suddenly act different when confronted? It's a bureaucratic BS statement from people who revel in bureaucratic BS.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago

The CoC members should all be expelled from the NumFocus community. They have done far more to make NumFocus a a non-welcoming community than just about any CoC violation.

xiphias2 6y ago
Another option is to just directly fund developers instead of through organizations. I tried to find the audits on the NumFOCUS website, but I wasn't able to find how much of the donations they are getting gets to the developers themselves. I would imagine, that it could be even under 50%.

sigmaprimus 6y ago

Just curious, what would You suggest as a remedy to this situation? This is an honest questions please don't get offended.

rmrfstar 6y ago
Honestly? They should be assigned 12 hours of reading that covers the history of due process, what it is, and why we have it.
- sigmaprimus 6y ago
  That seems like a reasonable suggestion, with the option of resignation, I was thinking more along the lines of financial compensation.

MattGaiser 6y ago

No, but you can only expect so much self flagellation. In a day and age of "deny, deny, deny" an apology is welcome, even if it is a bit CYA.

harlanji 6y ago

At very least the action is something to point to, and maintain reputation. Almost 5 years ago a hostile employer did this to me and since then most of my huge former network built over 15+ years have stopped associating with me and are starting to assume I’m mentally ill and hung up on it, but in truth I simply can’t work anymore due to the reference check process having been compromised and former associates lacking support. I’m now forced to go through legal channels to clear my name. If I can get an acknowledgement of their mistake then life will get much easier to explain. Too bad about the content, non-apology, but I’d not undetestimate the act alone.

marcinzm 6y ago
Except their apology doesn't do what you're saying as it doesn't say he was innocent or that he didn't violate the CoC. It simply says they didn't fully follow their process and that if he wants to appeal the board will hear it. As I read it he is still considered guilty unless the board accepts the appeal. edit: And since he seems too emotionally exhausted by this to deal with it further there will possibly be no appeal filed and thus he will stay guilty by default.
- harlanji 6y ago
  What I’m saying is that the statement “and they apologized” is true and very significant. It’s extremely uncommon to get that much. Picturing a job interview scenario. People are all emotion and that fragment does the job. Not picturing IRC with a bunch of invested people here, in which case yes, your point is logically valid there.
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    In my experience the people doing the interview are not at all emotional during a job interview. They're coldly cautious if anything. So an apology that isn't a full retraction won't matter since the person is still a potential risk in their eyes.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago

The apology is so vague and PR-washed that it’s nearly impossible to draw any conclusions. At this point, they won’t even acknowledge that the initial accusations were unreasonable. In fact, it appears they’ve simply transferred the investigation up a level to the board of directors so it can continue. A real apology would have acknowledged that they mishandled the situation and taken steps to resolve it as fast as possible. This feels more like an attempt to justify their actions, move the goal posts about what they did wrong, and move the investigation back behind closed doors within NumFOCUS. Please just publicly acknowledge that this should have been resolved within a day or two by absolving Jeremey of wrongdoing, and without this never ending inquisition that now involves even more and higher-ranking individuals at NumFOCUS. This is such a simple issue that never should have gone this far.