5 ms·

It's not a power grab, because they just relinquished power, even going to the point of leaving instructions for the next group of people that would take over.

by tinco 5y ago

It's not a power grab, because they just relinquished power, even going to the point of leaving instructions for the next group of people that would take over. Just this flaw in your logic probably landed you your first downvotes. Second, the CoC is not arbitrary, there's a link to it merged into the repository which means the core team (or at least a majority of it) agreed to it. Their resigning is just a signal that the CoC that they publicly announce is not actually being followed. It's nothing more than that. For a leadership to be accountable means that they follow the rules of the system, and should they not follow them they are ejected from it. It's as simple as that, no need for democracy, the system is clearly defined and agreed upon. I don't really get what you mean with "a bad look" for the moderation team. It's a bad look in the sense that it shows they actually had no power all along. But I don't think they were in it for the glory. A worse look is that of the core team, who have publicly stated their support of a CoC, and now when shit hit the fan show they won't actually abide by their own rules.

mjburgess 5y ago
Sure, in round one, they've resigned. Games are played over multiple rounds. We're yet to see how it plays out. Though I don't really expect those individuals to comeback, this may well just be a move to subsume the projects "technical goals" (ie., those of the core team) under the "ethical goals" of the moderation team. As a technical project, to me, this isnt that sensible. > leadership to be accountable means that they follow the rules of the system This misunderstands power. There are no (enforced) rules prior to power. Power is the mechanism by which there are rules. This resignation isn't to establish rules in the abstract -- the CoC exists. Its for a team to have the power to enforce them. And "Rules" here arent rules at all. They are principals. And pricipals trade-off against each other, and against other goals. When we say the core team has "agreed" that does not imply theyve agreed to all views the moderation team takes. I have no idea who is in the "right", to be clear, on the ethical issue. Perhaps a member of the core team has done something severely unethical (in which case, presumably the ethical thing to do is tell people...). However the phrasing of this as an explicit demand for power... to me reads a little off. It reads like they wish to be part of a project where an ethical ideology reins decisively above the technical goals. Eg., consider the core team will give a member "more latitude" to, say, rehabilitate if they've done something wrong. You might say they shouldnt. But it this a technical project, or a political-ethical one? Are its leaders meant to be morally excellent or excellent software developers? The reality is that technical projects require technical excellence, not moral excellence. A "moderation team" set-up to demand moral excellence can easily go too far and ruin a project. Of course, if a core member is deeply unethical one hopes the community & core-team will do something about it. My sense here is that if someone was "deeply unethical" they can be held to account by telling people about it. And if they weren't, then I imagine the core team have made the right decision for the project.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  > Games are played over multiple rounds. That may be so, but these people are no longer playing the game.
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    They're not dead.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      No, but when you resign you are no longer in a position to influence anything. Resignation is an act of last resort, you throw yourself on your sword in the hope that someone notices and that's that. You can do it exactly once.
      - ncmncm 5y ago
        Until they join something else. Resigning is a principled stand, and principles are respected in some places.
        jacquesm 5y ago
        Until this has been completely cleared up I highly doubt these moderators will be welcome anywhere else. For now they are almost (but not quite) as tainted as the core team because there is of course a chance that the core team is right and they are wrong.
PKop 5y ago
>It's not a power grab, because they just relinquished power Relinquished what power? If they had said power, surely they would have gotten their way yes? Perhaps this is just an incremental iteration of the ongoing fight for power, a last ditch effort to get public sentiment behind them. >agreed to it This could have been a tactical choice to avoid fighting head on in that battle, waging the larger war against the CoC by simply ignoring it over time. It is just as likely to assume many who "agreed" to it didn't really agree with it, evidenced by them not following it. And here we are, it seems these people have "won" as they didn't follow it and the the team pushing it/enforcing it lost. So perhaps this strategy was the optimal one. "Agree" to a thing to move on with more important matters and ignore those who nominally are tasked with enforcing it but have no real power, if ignored.
marginalia_nu 5y ago
If this wasn't about power, they wouldn't be airing their dirty laundry in public. The only reason you do that is because you're hoping to stir up some sort of shitstorm to (threaten to) damage the public perception of the project. It's juvenile he-said-she-said behavior that's barely above storming to your bedroom shouting "screw you, mom!" and slamming the door so hard a few shingles fall off the roof. Of course what you inevitably get isn't an internet shitstorm at all, but a bunch of rubberneckers gleefully gawking at the high school drama publicly unfolding in your organization.

by tinco 5y ago

mjburgess 5y ago

Sure, in round one, they've resigned. Games are played over multiple rounds. We're yet to see how it plays out. Though I don't really expect those individuals to comeback, this may well just be a move to subsume the projects "technical goals" (ie., those of the core team) under the "ethical goals" of the moderation team. As a technical project, to me, this isnt that sensible. > leadership to be accountable means that they follow the rules of the system This misunderstands power. There are no (enforced) rules prior to power. Power is the mechanism by which there are rules. This resignation isn't to establish rules in the abstract -- the CoC exists. Its for a team to have the power to enforce them. And "Rules" here arent rules at all. They are principals. And pricipals trade-off against each other, and against other goals. When we say the core team has "agreed" that does not imply theyve agreed to all views the moderation team takes. I have no idea who is in the "right", to be clear, on the ethical issue. Perhaps a member of the core team has done something severely unethical (in which case, presumably the ethical thing to do is tell people...). However the phrasing of this as an explicit demand for power... to me reads a little off. It reads like they wish to be part of a project where an ethical ideology reins decisively above the technical goals. Eg., consider the core team will give a member "more latitude" to, say, rehabilitate if they've done something wrong. You might say they shouldnt. But it this a technical project, or a political-ethical one? Are its leaders meant to be morally excellent or excellent software developers? The reality is that technical projects require technical excellence, not moral excellence. A "moderation team" set-up to demand moral excellence can easily go too far and ruin a project. Of course, if a core member is deeply unethical one hopes the community & core-team will do something about it. My sense here is that if someone was "deeply unethical" they can be held to account by telling people about it. And if they weren't, then I imagine the core team have made the right decision for the project.

jacquesm 5y ago
> Games are played over multiple rounds. That may be so, but these people are no longer playing the game.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  They're not dead.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    No, but when you resign you are no longer in a position to influence anything. Resignation is an act of last resort, you throw yourself on your sword in the hope that someone notices and that's that. You can do it exactly once.
    - ncmncm 5y ago
      Until they join something else. Resigning is a principled stand, and principles are respected in some places.
      - jacquesm 5y ago
        Until this has been completely cleared up I highly doubt these moderators will be welcome anywhere else. For now they are almost (but not quite) as tainted as the core team because there is of course a chance that the core team is right and they are wrong.

PKop 5y ago

>It's not a power grab, because they just relinquished power Relinquished what power? If they had said power, surely they would have gotten their way yes? Perhaps this is just an incremental iteration of the ongoing fight for power, a last ditch effort to get public sentiment behind them. >agreed to it This could have been a tactical choice to avoid fighting head on in that battle, waging the larger war against the CoC by simply ignoring it over time. It is just as likely to assume many who "agreed" to it didn't really agree with it, evidenced by them not following it. And here we are, it seems these people have "won" as they didn't follow it and the the team pushing it/enforcing it lost. So perhaps this strategy was the optimal one. "Agree" to a thing to move on with more important matters and ignore those who nominally are tasked with enforcing it but have no real power, if ignored.

marginalia_nu 5y ago

If this wasn't about power, they wouldn't be airing their dirty laundry in public. The only reason you do that is because you're hoping to stir up some sort of shitstorm to (threaten to) damage the public perception of the project. It's juvenile he-said-she-said behavior that's barely above storming to your bedroom shouting "screw you, mom!" and slamming the door so hard a few shingles fall off the roof. Of course what you inevitably get isn't an internet shitstorm at all, but a bunch of rubberneckers gleefully gawking at the high school drama publicly unfolding in your organization.