5 ms·

This is why folks can't take yall seriously when discussing code of conduct. This person has a history of being shitty, and they used the CoC to enforce a (temp

This is why folks can't take yall seriously when discussing code of conduct. This person has a history of being shitty, and they used the CoC to enforce a (temporary!) ban, citing the rules he violated. If the CoC didn't exist, you'd be screaming "he didn't do anything wrong", but obviously, according to the well posted rules, he did, and they enforced those rules for the good of the community. The reality of the situation is that yall don't want to be excluded from communities for being racist, misogynistic, or creepy.

chocalot 11mo ago
I looked into the issues listed ( https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-core-developer/60250 https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-co... ) and the surrounding context, and they all looked tenuous. I'd expect to see at see at least some clear cases. I think moderation and CoCs are needed, but this example looks to be an example of their misuse.
- ayhanfuat 11mo ago
  It's been over a year, and they still haven't provided any tangible examples to support their claims. The best they could come up with was something like "he used the wink emoji" I think. There have been hundreds of posts, and many community members have demanded either evidence to back up those accusations or a public apology to Tim and their removal. But of course, those people are racist, misogynist, or creeps so nothing came out of it.
  - computerthings 11mo ago
    [dead]
hitekker 11mo ago
If Tim Peters has a "history of being shitty", I'd expect Wikipedia to mention it. But his article is clean, if not golden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Peters_(software_engineer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Peters_(software_engineer). The only thing I've heard is that he's a bit neurodivergent/socially awkward, which I thought we were suppose to be welcoming and inclusive of. The reality is that you may be confusing a victim with your political enemies.
- ryan_lane 11mo ago
  I wouldn't expect it to show up on their Wikipedia page, because Wikipedia has a high barrier for what they consider reliable information, and they wouldn't use email list postings, or personal accounts of behavior in what they'd include. This person isn't really relevant enough for his behavior to show up in the news. But, the employees at the foundation, who are responsible for keeping the community healthy, and for enforcing policies, would absolutely take complaints, then use personal accounts, email list history, chat history, and such. It's effectively like how HR works. > The only thing I've heard Right, because you're talking to the wrong people, and you're ignoring the fact that he has had folks complain about his behavior, and you're also ignoring his email list and chat history, which you could go look at. You're acting like this is some kind of witch hunt, when it's simply "HR" enforcing "employment handbook" standards. It just happens to be that this is a set of volunteers, rather than employees.
  - retsibsi 11mo ago
    > and you're also ignoring his email list and chat history, which you could go look at. I'm not the person you replied to but I've just spent a bunch of time looking at (what seem to be) the relevant posts on https://discuss.python.org/ https://discuss.python.org/, along with a couple of external posts about the ban, and I've yet to find anything that looks like a pattern of shitty behaviour on the part of Tim Peters. I wasn't previously aware of him and I obviously may have missed something important, so I ask this in good faith: can you point to some of the specific emails/chats you had in mind? (I'm happy not to argue the point if you'd prefer not to; I'd just like to see the strongest anti-Peters evidence.)
  - hitekker 11mo ago
    I was looking for a credible source, which you have not supplied. The threads you've waved at do not show Tim to be the "racist, sexist or creep" that you've insinuated. Rather, they show a committee that can't handle questions, abuses its own rules, and hides behind HR & secret "complaints". Of course, that's just my opinion from skimming. It'd be better to have someone credible give honest evidence, instead of someone defaming & blaming while projecting their bigotry onto others.
rurban 11mo ago
On the contrary! https://chrismcdonough.substack.com/p/the-shameful-defenestration-of-tim https://chrismcdonough.substack.com/p/the-shameful-defenestr...
- Scarblac 11mo ago
  What a good post and what a sad decision.
- ziotom78 11mo ago
  Thanks for the link, I was not aware of this story.
- elcritch 11mo ago
  The steering committee folks sound like a microcosm of a communist poliburo. Aiming for who can be the most offended over imaginary slights. I'm glad as An American tax payer that we're not funding an organization with such petty politics and discriminatory behaviors. Tim sounds similar to John Carmack recent she post about Meta: > I wish I could drop (so many of) my old internal posts publicly, since I don’t really have the incentive to relitigate the arguments today – they were carefully considered and prescient. They also got me reported to HR by the manager of the XROS effort for supposedly making his team members feel bad https://x.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1961172409920491849 https://x.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1961172409920491849
  - rurban 11mo ago
    And it's not only limited to python. Same things happened to perl, ruby, node, and even in some film communities which I was member of. Once you have such a committee or COC, game over.
    - Imustaskforhelp 11mo ago
      If I may ask, what are some better alternatives than commitee's or Code of conducts which can work? Or is it just a equlibra of just that they might be the best thing we have got currently or something similar?
skylurk 11mo ago
> This person has a history of being shitty All evidence I have seen points to the contrary. > citing the rules he violated I wish I could have the graciousness of Tim Peters. Those accusations were not made in good faith.
bgwalter 11mo ago
The reality is that they go after intelligent people and political opponents on specious grounds because they are jealous and want to preserve their own power. You can dig up any number of posts on anyone, as Richelieu has pointed out pre-Internet.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
zahlman 11mo ago
> This person has a history of being shitty, No, he does not. He has been a pillar of the community since the beginning, and well loved by many. He has also been trusted with various forms of moderation authority in the past, and his decisions were respected at the time. > and they used the CoC to enforce a (temporary!) ban, citing the rules he violated. Please read https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-core-developer/60250 https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-co..., and then https://tim-one.github.io/psf/crimes.html https://tim-one.github.io/psf/crimes.html . Mr. Peters is, if anything, overly self-critical here. He quite frankly did nothing wrong. The supposed "rule violations" include things that no reasonable person could actually object to, as well as complete mischaracterizations of the observable facts. In some places, multiple points appear to refer to the same action. In some places it's unclear what is referred to and there has never been any official explanation. In no case is any evidence provided. > If the CoC didn't exist, you'd be screaming "he didn't do anything wrong" I am saying it (your use of the word "screaming" here is demeaning, substance-less rhetoric) because it is in fact the case. Many of the cited "violations" don't actually go against the Code of Conduct (https://policies.python.org/python.org/code-of-conduct/ https://policies.python.org/python.org/code-of-conduct/), even if they were true and accurate. > but obviously, according to the well posted rules, he did It is not obvious, because it is incorrect. > and they enforced those rules for the good of the community. No useful purpose was served by this suspension. > The reality of the situation is that yall don't want to be excluded from communities for being racist, misogynistic, or creepy. This accusation is baseless, incorrect, and offensive.
- shadowgovt 11mo ago
  > No, he does not. He has been a pillar of the community since the beginning, and well loved by many. These are not mutually exclusive states. If anything, it has improved my esteem of PSL that they were willing to hold one of their "inner circle" up to scrutiny. Even Linus Torvalds came around to the idea that he was a great software engineer and a mean individual to interact with. There's room for improvement in most if not all of us. I'm impressed at both Tim and the PSL for being able to disagree, go through a suspension, and come to terms. It's the kind of potential for growth that makes it a comfortable ecosystem to work in. > The supposed "rule violations" include things that no reasonable person could actually object to The problem with the "reasonable person" standard is that it's subjectivity masked in objectivity; we don't poll ten thousand people to decide what "reasonable" looks like. It's another term for "common sense," and... Common sense moves. Common sense said slavery was fine three hundred years ago. Common sense said homosexuality was an abomination sixty years ago. Common sense said you could be as awful to interact with as you wanted as long as you were making software people craved thirty years ago. We grow and change.

chocalot 11mo ago

I looked into the issues listed ( https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-core-developer/60250 https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-co... ) and the surrounding context, and they all looked tenuous. I'd expect to see at see at least some clear cases. I think moderation and CoCs are needed, but this example looks to be an example of their misuse.

ayhanfuat 11mo ago
It's been over a year, and they still haven't provided any tangible examples to support their claims. The best they could come up with was something like "he used the wink emoji" I think. There have been hundreds of posts, and many community members have demanded either evidence to back up those accusations or a public apology to Tim and their removal. But of course, those people are racist, misogynist, or creeps so nothing came out of it.
- computerthings 11mo ago
  [dead]

hitekker 11mo ago

If Tim Peters has a "history of being shitty", I'd expect Wikipedia to mention it. But his article is clean, if not golden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Peters_(software_engineer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Peters_(software_engineer). The only thing I've heard is that he's a bit neurodivergent/socially awkward, which I thought we were suppose to be welcoming and inclusive of. The reality is that you may be confusing a victim with your political enemies.

ryan_lane 11mo ago
I wouldn't expect it to show up on their Wikipedia page, because Wikipedia has a high barrier for what they consider reliable information, and they wouldn't use email list postings, or personal accounts of behavior in what they'd include. This person isn't really relevant enough for his behavior to show up in the news. But, the employees at the foundation, who are responsible for keeping the community healthy, and for enforcing policies, would absolutely take complaints, then use personal accounts, email list history, chat history, and such. It's effectively like how HR works. > The only thing I've heard Right, because you're talking to the wrong people, and you're ignoring the fact that he has had folks complain about his behavior, and you're also ignoring his email list and chat history, which you could go look at. You're acting like this is some kind of witch hunt, when it's simply "HR" enforcing "employment handbook" standards. It just happens to be that this is a set of volunteers, rather than employees.
- retsibsi 11mo ago
  > and you're also ignoring his email list and chat history, which you could go look at. I'm not the person you replied to but I've just spent a bunch of time looking at (what seem to be) the relevant posts on https://discuss.python.org/ https://discuss.python.org/, along with a couple of external posts about the ban, and I've yet to find anything that looks like a pattern of shitty behaviour on the part of Tim Peters. I wasn't previously aware of him and I obviously may have missed something important, so I ask this in good faith: can you point to some of the specific emails/chats you had in mind? (I'm happy not to argue the point if you'd prefer not to; I'd just like to see the strongest anti-Peters evidence.)
- hitekker 11mo ago
  I was looking for a credible source, which you have not supplied. The threads you've waved at do not show Tim to be the "racist, sexist or creep" that you've insinuated. Rather, they show a committee that can't handle questions, abuses its own rules, and hides behind HR & secret "complaints". Of course, that's just my opinion from skimming. It'd be better to have someone credible give honest evidence, instead of someone defaming & blaming while projecting their bigotry onto others.

rurban 11mo ago

On the contrary! https://chrismcdonough.substack.com/p/the-shameful-defenestration-of-tim https://chrismcdonough.substack.com/p/the-shameful-defenestr...

Scarblac 11mo ago
What a good post and what a sad decision.
ziotom78 11mo ago
Thanks for the link, I was not aware of this story.
elcritch 11mo ago
The steering committee folks sound like a microcosm of a communist poliburo. Aiming for who can be the most offended over imaginary slights. I'm glad as An American tax payer that we're not funding an organization with such petty politics and discriminatory behaviors. Tim sounds similar to John Carmack recent she post about Meta: > I wish I could drop (so many of) my old internal posts publicly, since I don’t really have the incentive to relitigate the arguments today – they were carefully considered and prescient. They also got me reported to HR by the manager of the XROS effort for supposedly making his team members feel bad https://x.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1961172409920491849 https://x.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1961172409920491849
- rurban 11mo ago
  And it's not only limited to python. Same things happened to perl, ruby, node, and even in some film communities which I was member of. Once you have such a committee or COC, game over.
  - Imustaskforhelp 11mo ago
    If I may ask, what are some better alternatives than commitee's or Code of conducts which can work? Or is it just a equlibra of just that they might be the best thing we have got currently or something similar?

skylurk 11mo ago

> This person has a history of being shitty All evidence I have seen points to the contrary. > citing the rules he violated I wish I could have the graciousness of Tim Peters. Those accusations were not made in good faith.

bgwalter 11mo ago

The reality is that they go after intelligent people and political opponents on specious grounds because they are jealous and want to preserve their own power. You can dig up any number of posts on anyone, as Richelieu has pointed out pre-Internet.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

zahlman 11mo ago

> This person has a history of being shitty, No, he does not. He has been a pillar of the community since the beginning, and well loved by many. He has also been trusted with various forms of moderation authority in the past, and his decisions were respected at the time. > and they used the CoC to enforce a (temporary!) ban, citing the rules he violated. Please read https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-core-developer/60250 https://discuss.python.org/t/three-month-suspension-for-a-co..., and then https://tim-one.github.io/psf/crimes.html https://tim-one.github.io/psf/crimes.html . Mr. Peters is, if anything, overly self-critical here. He quite frankly did nothing wrong. The supposed "rule violations" include things that no reasonable person could actually object to, as well as complete mischaracterizations of the observable facts. In some places, multiple points appear to refer to the same action. In some places it's unclear what is referred to and there has never been any official explanation. In no case is any evidence provided. > If the CoC didn't exist, you'd be screaming "he didn't do anything wrong" I am saying it (your use of the word "screaming" here is demeaning, substance-less rhetoric) because it is in fact the case. Many of the cited "violations" don't actually go against the Code of Conduct (https://policies.python.org/python.org/code-of-conduct/ https://policies.python.org/python.org/code-of-conduct/), even if they were true and accurate. > but obviously, according to the well posted rules, he did It is not obvious, because it is incorrect. > and they enforced those rules for the good of the community. No useful purpose was served by this suspension. > The reality of the situation is that yall don't want to be excluded from communities for being racist, misogynistic, or creepy. This accusation is baseless, incorrect, and offensive.

shadowgovt 11mo ago
> No, he does not. He has been a pillar of the community since the beginning, and well loved by many. These are not mutually exclusive states. If anything, it has improved my esteem of PSL that they were willing to hold one of their "inner circle" up to scrutiny. Even Linus Torvalds came around to the idea that he was a great software engineer and a mean individual to interact with. There's room for improvement in most if not all of us. I'm impressed at both Tim and the PSL for being able to disagree, go through a suspension, and come to terms. It's the kind of potential for growth that makes it a comfortable ecosystem to work in. > The supposed "rule violations" include things that no reasonable person could actually object to The problem with the "reasonable person" standard is that it's subjectivity masked in objectivity; we don't poll ten thousand people to decide what "reasonable" looks like. It's another term for "common sense," and... Common sense moves. Common sense said slavery was fine three hundred years ago. Common sense said homosexuality was an abomination sixty years ago. Common sense said you could be as awful to interact with as you wanted as long as you were making software people craved thirty years ago. We grow and change.