39 ms·

GitHub: Block the Bullies

255 points by remi 15y ago

getsat 15y ago
Is this due to the recent drama with Zed Shaw being invited to the "DongML" project? Very entertaining as an observer, but very annoying for Zed I'm sure. Sad that they still haven't added a requirement that you accept an invite to become a collaborator, or at least a profile setting on your account that requires that confirmation.
- latch 15y ago
  Sad that they still haven't added a requirement that you accept an invite to become a collaborator That's one way to look at it..the other way is that they just designed coded, tested and rolled out a feature a day or two after a fairly hostile and accusatory customer complaint.
- josegonzalez 15y ago
  It was. But he is technically a "customer". More eyeballs == more potential conversions. Zed happens to give that, fortunately or unfortunately. But they were able to please a potential customer, and just give a better product overall. So maybe its because of something bad, but it's great product iteration.
- kneath 15y ago
  It's interesting to me that so many people want confirmations. You can remove yourself from any repository you wish at https://github.com/account/repositories https://github.com/account/repositories (yes, I know — this is a confusing place. It's something I'd like to improve). But the idea is that "Confirm? Reject." is the same number of steps/interactions as "Added. Reject." Confirmations wouldn't make the experience any better for someone being annoyingly added to projects. They'd just be rejecting invitations instead of rejecting access. As it stands, when you are added as a collaborator to a project it shows up in exactly one place — your private, logged in dashboard. It doesn't show up publicly anywhere. Bypassing confirmations keeps the workflow simple for the professionals who use GitHub and want to collaborate with ease.
  - kellishaver 15y ago
    I tend to agree with this line of thinking. I was added to half a dozen projects today alone. It would have been a pain to have to confirm each one. Your average professional developer isn't trolled on a regular basis, nor would they go about adding "tech stars" to their repos just to have a big name on there or because they wished that person was a contributor - it's unprofessional and rude. So just dismissing yourself from the projects you are maliciously or mistakenly added to seems much simpler than having to confirm each one.
  - masterzora 15y ago
    I agree that I don't want to see confirmations in my GitHub, but you are incorrect about them being equivalent. The optimal way to use confirmations is often not hitting "Reject" to requests you don't want. Just do nothing. In most well-designed systems, as long as there's an outstanding request, they can't bug you any more.
    - omaranto 15y ago
      You can't have "do nothing" mean both "do not accept (yet?)" and also "accept!"; if no action keeps you from accepting, it means it'll take an extra step to actually accept an invitation. If the common case is not trolling, that adds friction.
      - masterzora 15y ago
        I'm not sure what you're arguing here. Obviously "do nothing" can't mean both. Obviously the entire point of a confirmation would be such that it would take an action to be "accept", so that means that "do nothing" would have to be "do not accept (yet?)". Obviously this is only useful for GH if trolling is the common case. And obviously I started my post by saying I did not want confirmations. So what exactly are you trying to argue against?
        omaranto 15y ago
        Upon rereading I'm not sure what I meant either. My guess is that I was responding to > The optimal way to use confirmations is often not hitting "Reject" to requests you don't want. Just do nothing. and didn't read carefully. I was probably pointing out that if trolling is not the common case then that system is not in fact optimal (which I think we agree on), without realizing you didn't claim it was the optimal system but only the optimal system-which-uses-confirmations. Sorry about that.
mycroftiv 15y ago
This is a very good feature, but I am also afraid it will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change. "If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent. The fact that controversy and negativity attracts eyeballs and can trigger improvements is understandable, but it also creates perverse incentives.
- marcusbooster 15y ago
  You could chalk it up to stress testing that pointed out a flaw. And to GitHub's credit they provided a quick fix and a professional response, kudos to them. Peace has been restored in the Valley, and the trolls are left to twiddle their ASCII dongs.
- compay 15y ago
  Sometimes you have to look at what somebody says, and not how they say it. I personally wouldn't have approached the trolls the way Zed did, but he was right that this was broken and needed to be fixed. Github did a great job - as far as I can tell they handled things professionally and cranked out a fix in just a few days. Everybody wins (except the trolls).
  - endlessvoid94 15y ago
    I do not agree. You can't simply ignore HOW somebody says something. How you say something almost more important than what you say. If Zed hadn't written a blog post detailing how he fucked everything up (in all his greatness, apparently) it wouldn't have gotten such exposure and would likely have died out. He had to make his point with a hammer or it wouldn't have mattered. And it's unfortunate that it took a hammer to make the point. I'd even go so far as to say this feature isn't actually all that important. Zed Shaw just MADE it important.
    - catch23 15y ago
      You still have to admit that zed went through a lot of trouble just to stop the harassment. I'd probably make a blog post too if the harassment went on for as long as it did for zed.
endlessvoid94 15y ago
I think this was a good response to an attention whore. EDIT: I wasn't trolling. Not even a single response?
- jonursenbach 15y ago
  I never understood why people absolutely loathe Zed Shaw.
  - endlessvoid94 15y ago
    I don't loathe him at all. I just think he could spend his time better, especially when he has such a captivated audience. Instead of setting an example of being a troll and responding immaturely (and threatening to leave github, oh my). He's fairly arrogant and preaches his opinions on how to run startups, of which he's never done. He seems to inflame conversations for the sake of inflaming them. That's all. He likes the attention.
  - redthrowaway 15y ago
    I don't actively loathe him, but the persona he spends so much time cultivating is brash and irritating. It seems whenever I see his name mentioned, it's because he's making a stink about something, rather than doing something useful. I get that he does useful things, and LPtHW is apparently a great resource, but he (intentionally) attracts far more attention with his antics than his works. The court jester may make a good point every now and then, but he's still a clown.
    - zedshaw 15y ago
      Oh look, another anonymous troll that has exactly the same validity and standing as my comment. This place is awesome with the anonymous posters.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
dwlathrop 15y ago
I think zed had a reasonable complaint. was he a jerk about it? maybe, but it's a customer's prerogative to complain about a bad experience. github's prompt response to zed has made me a happier (paying) customer. way to go!
- grandalf 15y ago
  Zed had a very reasonable complaint, if a bit thin skinned.
- look_lookatme 15y ago
  YEP! Props to Zed. After calling a bunch of people homophobes and writing some code to engage in an asshole war within the confines of GitHub, he got a simple feature implemented that would have probably been fast tracked with a reasonable email.
code_duck 15y ago
It's a logical feature for a site with a social aspect to offer, and I'm surprised github hadn't done so previously. I suppose the audience for the site tends to be mature. Good for Github for going ahead and doing it. I know of some companies who would have dug their heels in and ignored the issue, or stubbornly maintained that it wasn't needed.
pufuwozu 15y ago
This is GitHub's response to the (killed) article I posted yesterday: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2601342 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2601342
joyce_ampah 15y ago
Hello
chmike 15y ago
The implemented solution is impressively elegant. Keep the barrier very low to join another project and provide a mean to block undesirable subsciptions. There is still a possibility for harrasement with multiple projects, but there is a report to staff option now to solve it. These are very smart, efficient and pragmatic solutions. It's also a demonstration of what is meant by "good execution".
jz 15y ago
Background: http://sheddingbikes.com/posts/1306816425.html http://sheddingbikes.com/posts/1306816425.html In all fairness, the guy was being a dick (no pun intended) to Zed. However, Zed should have kept the insults to the troll and left Github, Powerset, Engine Yard, and the Ruby community out.
- defroost 15y ago
  I guess he felt that others besides the troll were having a laugh at his expense, (i.e., the HN Tips guys comments, other penis-oriented repos connected to employees of aforementioned companies) and were, if only indirectly, in on the joke.
  - zedshaw 15y ago
    Yep, that's what people seem to gloss over when they think I just overreacted. I knew for a fact that several Ruby people considered this hilarious, and that one or more of them worked at github. In that situation, it's either I leave silently (which everyone thinks I should have done), or bring the issue up and make sure everyone knows what's going on. I prefer the latter because it at least lets others come behind me and avoid the problem. Thankfully, they've fixed the problem now and I don't have to worry about it anymore.
    - robsan 15y ago
      You and others which may have been trolled before and did not "make a fuss". I see many here with a bully mentality, saying that one should just keep their head down and endure the trolls crap and they will go away. Except they won't.
- gaius 15y ago
  How does anyone in the Ruby "community" have the time to get any actual work done? No other language community in the world behaves like this.
  - wisty 15y ago
rgbrgb 15y ago
Ah, the age old enmity between nerds and bullies.
willvarfar 15y ago
The profile page needs tidy up - if only it split the projects into tbose you collaborate on,and those you are invited to collaborate on. Its just wording, but it makes it clear that being added to a repo you haven't contributed to will not be shown publicly.
- fhars 15y ago
  There is somethig to that idea: you are only invited to participate in a project until you accept the invitation by actually commiting to the project. Eveyone is happy: Nobody needs to change the code (except for resorting the display of the projects on the private dashboard into two groups) and participation requires an explicit confirmation. Win-win :-).
senthilnayagam 15y ago
convenience and privacy are the issues, github has tried to do a balancing act.
illumen 15y ago
I wish I could block zedshaw from all of the internet. I wrote a web proxy once which cuts out adverts - I think I could extend it to block zedshaw too. But my proxy is old, and had bugs with some webservers. Maybe a zedblock plugin for firefox would be cool instead? Even better would be to just integrate it into firefox. But then you'd still have to put up with the character whilst using other browsers. Which means a WC3 draft would be more appropriate, so that all of the browsers could implement it. I imagine WHATWG have already got something in the works though. They've been doing a lot of good work with the whole html5 thing. Does it bother anyone else that github appears to be following a Concerned father approach here? I guess it's not that bad. Other internet forums have moderators and such, but github isn't really about the project - but the individual. So I'm not sure how letting other people moderate for you would work within the github garden. </nonsense>
frou_dh 15y ago
Zed just seems to react strongly to anyone who tries to intimidate him. Same deal with all the people called out in the classic Rails post. I don't fault him for it.
- Mafana0 15y ago
  Would you post a link to the referred post?
  - frou_dh 15y ago
    http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/ruby/rails/is-a-ghetto http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/ruby/rails/is-a-ghetto
    - Mafana0 15y ago
      Thank you.
sondh 15y ago
That was fast!
linlijunjj 15y ago
--Something unexpected surprise-- Hello. My friend === http://www.betterwholesaler.us/ http://www.betterwholesaler.us/ ==== Dedi cated service, the new style, so you feel like a warm spring!!! WE ACCEPT PYA PAL PAY MENT YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!! thank you!!!
16s 15y ago
I'm glad Zed made this an issue. No one should be harassed like that. Honestly, it made github look very unprofessional. I'm glad they stepped-in and fixed it.
mdg 15y ago
I flagged this. It wasn't submitted to let people know about the feature, it was submitted to stir the pot.
Fester 15y ago
Now Github became a real social network.
drivingmenuts 15y ago
I'm surprised that this feature wasn't in there to begin with. All social networking (which is primarily what Github is about - the source control really isn't anything new) should include bilateral confirmation. What they've implemented is adequate, but I'd rather see something much stronger, like active confirmation from both parties before being added to a project.

255 points by remi 15y ago

Is this due to the recent drama with Zed Shaw being invited to the "DongML" project? Very entertaining as an observer, but very annoying for Zed I'm sure. Sad that they still haven't added a requirement that you accept an invite to become a collaborator, or at least a profile setting on your account that requires that confirmation.

latch 15y ago
Sad that they still haven't added a requirement that you accept an invite to become a collaborator That's one way to look at it..the other way is that they just designed coded, tested and rolled out a feature a day or two after a fairly hostile and accusatory customer complaint.
josegonzalez 15y ago
It was. But he is technically a "customer". More eyeballs == more potential conversions. Zed happens to give that, fortunately or unfortunately. But they were able to please a potential customer, and just give a better product overall. So maybe its because of something bad, but it's great product iteration.
kneath 15y ago
It's interesting to me that so many people want confirmations. You can remove yourself from any repository you wish at https://github.com/account/repositories https://github.com/account/repositories (yes, I know — this is a confusing place. It's something I'd like to improve). But the idea is that "Confirm? Reject." is the same number of steps/interactions as "Added. Reject." Confirmations wouldn't make the experience any better for someone being annoyingly added to projects. They'd just be rejecting invitations instead of rejecting access. As it stands, when you are added as a collaborator to a project it shows up in exactly one place — your private, logged in dashboard. It doesn't show up publicly anywhere. Bypassing confirmations keeps the workflow simple for the professionals who use GitHub and want to collaborate with ease.
- kellishaver 15y ago
  I tend to agree with this line of thinking. I was added to half a dozen projects today alone. It would have been a pain to have to confirm each one. Your average professional developer isn't trolled on a regular basis, nor would they go about adding "tech stars" to their repos just to have a big name on there or because they wished that person was a contributor - it's unprofessional and rude. So just dismissing yourself from the projects you are maliciously or mistakenly added to seems much simpler than having to confirm each one.
- masterzora 15y ago
  I agree that I don't want to see confirmations in my GitHub, but you are incorrect about them being equivalent. The optimal way to use confirmations is often not hitting "Reject" to requests you don't want. Just do nothing. In most well-designed systems, as long as there's an outstanding request, they can't bug you any more.
  - omaranto 15y ago
    You can't have "do nothing" mean both "do not accept (yet?)" and also "accept!"; if no action keeps you from accepting, it means it'll take an extra step to actually accept an invitation. If the common case is not trolling, that adds friction.
    - masterzora 15y ago
      I'm not sure what you're arguing here. Obviously "do nothing" can't mean both. Obviously the entire point of a confirmation would be such that it would take an action to be "accept", so that means that "do nothing" would have to be "do not accept (yet?)". Obviously this is only useful for GH if trolling is the common case. And obviously I started my post by saying I did not want confirmations. So what exactly are you trying to argue against?
      - omaranto 15y ago
        Upon rereading I'm not sure what I meant either. My guess is that I was responding to > The optimal way to use confirmations is often not hitting "Reject" to requests you don't want. Just do nothing. and didn't read carefully. I was probably pointing out that if trolling is not the common case then that system is not in fact optimal (which I think we agree on), without realizing you didn't claim it was the optimal system but only the optimal system-which-uses-confirmations. Sorry about that.

mycroftiv 15y ago

This is a very good feature, but I am also afraid it will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change. "If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent. The fact that controversy and negativity attracts eyeballs and can trigger improvements is understandable, but it also creates perverse incentives.

marcusbooster 15y ago
You could chalk it up to stress testing that pointed out a flaw. And to GitHub's credit they provided a quick fix and a professional response, kudos to them. Peace has been restored in the Valley, and the trolls are left to twiddle their ASCII dongs.
compay 15y ago
Sometimes you have to look at what somebody says, and not how they say it. I personally wouldn't have approached the trolls the way Zed did, but he was right that this was broken and needed to be fixed. Github did a great job - as far as I can tell they handled things professionally and cranked out a fix in just a few days. Everybody wins (except the trolls).
- endlessvoid94 15y ago
  I do not agree. You can't simply ignore HOW somebody says something. How you say something almost more important than what you say. If Zed hadn't written a blog post detailing how he fucked everything up (in all his greatness, apparently) it wouldn't have gotten such exposure and would likely have died out. He had to make his point with a hammer or it wouldn't have mattered. And it's unfortunate that it took a hammer to make the point. I'd even go so far as to say this feature isn't actually all that important. Zed Shaw just MADE it important.
  - catch23 15y ago
    You still have to admit that zed went through a lot of trouble just to stop the harassment. I'd probably make a blog post too if the harassment went on for as long as it did for zed.

endlessvoid94 15y ago

I think this was a good response to an attention whore. EDIT: I wasn't trolling. Not even a single response?

jonursenbach 15y ago
I never understood why people absolutely loathe Zed Shaw.
- endlessvoid94 15y ago
  I don't loathe him at all. I just think he could spend his time better, especially when he has such a captivated audience. Instead of setting an example of being a troll and responding immaturely (and threatening to leave github, oh my). He's fairly arrogant and preaches his opinions on how to run startups, of which he's never done. He seems to inflame conversations for the sake of inflaming them. That's all. He likes the attention.
- redthrowaway 15y ago
  I don't actively loathe him, but the persona he spends so much time cultivating is brash and irritating. It seems whenever I see his name mentioned, it's because he's making a stink about something, rather than doing something useful. I get that he does useful things, and LPtHW is apparently a great resource, but he (intentionally) attracts far more attention with his antics than his works. The court jester may make a good point every now and then, but he's still a clown.
  - zedshaw 15y ago
    Oh look, another anonymous troll that has exactly the same validity and standing as my comment. This place is awesome with the anonymous posters.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]

dwlathrop 15y ago

I think zed had a reasonable complaint. was he a jerk about it? maybe, but it's a customer's prerogative to complain about a bad experience. github's prompt response to zed has made me a happier (paying) customer. way to go!

grandalf 15y ago
Zed had a very reasonable complaint, if a bit thin skinned.
look_lookatme 15y ago
YEP! Props to Zed. After calling a bunch of people homophobes and writing some code to engage in an asshole war within the confines of GitHub, he got a simple feature implemented that would have probably been fast tracked with a reasonable email.

code_duck 15y ago

It's a logical feature for a site with a social aspect to offer, and I'm surprised github hadn't done so previously. I suppose the audience for the site tends to be mature. Good for Github for going ahead and doing it. I know of some companies who would have dug their heels in and ignored the issue, or stubbornly maintained that it wasn't needed.

pufuwozu 15y ago

This is GitHub's response to the (killed) article I posted yesterday: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2601342 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2601342

joyce_ampah 15y ago

Hello

chmike 15y ago

The implemented solution is impressively elegant. Keep the barrier very low to join another project and provide a mean to block undesirable subsciptions. There is still a possibility for harrasement with multiple projects, but there is a report to staff option now to solve it. These are very smart, efficient and pragmatic solutions. It's also a demonstration of what is meant by "good execution".

jz 15y ago

Background: http://sheddingbikes.com/posts/1306816425.html http://sheddingbikes.com/posts/1306816425.html In all fairness, the guy was being a dick (no pun intended) to Zed. However, Zed should have kept the insults to the troll and left Github, Powerset, Engine Yard, and the Ruby community out.

defroost 15y ago
I guess he felt that others besides the troll were having a laugh at his expense, (i.e., the HN Tips guys comments, other penis-oriented repos connected to employees of aforementioned companies) and were, if only indirectly, in on the joke.
- zedshaw 15y ago
  Yep, that's what people seem to gloss over when they think I just overreacted. I knew for a fact that several Ruby people considered this hilarious, and that one or more of them worked at github. In that situation, it's either I leave silently (which everyone thinks I should have done), or bring the issue up and make sure everyone knows what's going on. I prefer the latter because it at least lets others come behind me and avoid the problem. Thankfully, they've fixed the problem now and I don't have to worry about it anymore.
  - robsan 15y ago
    You and others which may have been trolled before and did not "make a fuss". I see many here with a bully mentality, saying that one should just keep their head down and endure the trolls crap and they will go away. Except they won't.
gaius 15y ago
How does anyone in the Ruby "community" have the time to get any actual work done? No other language community in the world behaves like this.
- wisty 15y ago

rgbrgb 15y ago

Ah, the age old enmity between nerds and bullies.

willvarfar 15y ago

The profile page needs tidy up - if only it split the projects into tbose you collaborate on,and those you are invited to collaborate on. Its just wording, but it makes it clear that being added to a repo you haven't contributed to will not be shown publicly.

fhars 15y ago
There is somethig to that idea: you are only invited to participate in a project until you accept the invitation by actually commiting to the project. Eveyone is happy: Nobody needs to change the code (except for resorting the display of the projects on the private dashboard into two groups) and participation requires an explicit confirmation. Win-win :-).

senthilnayagam 15y ago

convenience and privacy are the issues, github has tried to do a balancing act.

illumen 15y ago

I wish I could block zedshaw from all of the internet. I wrote a web proxy once which cuts out adverts - I think I could extend it to block zedshaw too. But my proxy is old, and had bugs with some webservers. Maybe a zedblock plugin for firefox would be cool instead? Even better would be to just integrate it into firefox. But then you'd still have to put up with the character whilst using other browsers. Which means a WC3 draft would be more appropriate, so that all of the browsers could implement it. I imagine WHATWG have already got something in the works though. They've been doing a lot of good work with the whole html5 thing. Does it bother anyone else that github appears to be following a Concerned father approach here? I guess it's not that bad. Other internet forums have moderators and such, but github isn't really about the project - but the individual. So I'm not sure how letting other people moderate for you would work within the github garden. </nonsense>

frou_dh 15y ago

Zed just seems to react strongly to anyone who tries to intimidate him. Same deal with all the people called out in the classic Rails post. I don't fault him for it.

Mafana0 15y ago
Would you post a link to the referred post?
- frou_dh 15y ago
  http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/ruby/rails/is-a-ghetto http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/ruby/rails/is-a-ghetto
  - Mafana0 15y ago
    Thank you.

sondh 15y ago

That was fast!

linlijunjj 15y ago

--Something unexpected surprise-- Hello. My friend === http://www.betterwholesaler.us/ http://www.betterwholesaler.us/ ==== Dedi cated service, the new style, so you feel like a warm spring!!! WE ACCEPT PYA PAL PAY MENT YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!! thank you!!!

16s 15y ago

I'm glad Zed made this an issue. No one should be harassed like that. Honestly, it made github look very unprofessional. I'm glad they stepped-in and fixed it.

mdg 15y ago

I flagged this. It wasn't submitted to let people know about the feature, it was submitted to stir the pot.

Fester 15y ago

Now Github became a real social network.

drivingmenuts 15y ago

I'm surprised that this feature wasn't in there to begin with. All social networking (which is primarily what Github is about - the source control really isn't anything new) should include bilateral confirmation. What they've implemented is adequate, but I'd rather see something much stronger, like active confirmation from both parties before being added to a project.