5 ms·

Until there's a second side to this my GitHub use is not going to continue. Sad to see this happen, but it's not hard to change origins on my repos to BitBucket

Until there's a second side to this my GitHub use is not going to continue. Sad to see this happen, but it's not hard to change origins on my repos to BitBucket or Gitlab. edit: and again, it's two commands to push my repo back. but i have no interest in being with github at this time

Ryel 13y ago
LOL
iwasphone 13y ago
Isn't it better to wait until all sides of the story have been told?
- iancarroll 13y ago
  The likelihood she's lying is next to zero. You don't really make these things up...
  - iwasphone 13y ago
    HN really needs a reply bot that links to the appropriate wikipedia article on logical fallacies.
    - LockeWatts 13y ago
      I think that would just get out of hand. Also, HN being all human comments is actually rather refreshing, compared to the rest of the Internet.
    - baddox 13y ago
      What fallacy would that comment even be? It's just a factually incorrect statement.
  - Crito 13y ago
    I hope you understand that the truth is not simply a matter of if somebody is lying or not. Recollections can be flawed. Perceptions may be biased. Knowledge of other factors may be limited. Events or circumstances may be unintentionally unconsidered or mentioned. There is always value in hearing the take of other people, even when you are an involved party (and therefore able to be certain that you are not lying).
  - thesz 13y ago
    She don't need to lie, she can talk about her feelings. Most of the situations in the article are pretty much innocent, but feelings provoked in her aren't. You cannot verify or falsify feelings. They can have different plausible origins. She present one origin, you say she is right. Yes, her side is plausible. The worst thing here is that some of the origins can be offending to some of participants. You chose side that offends Github team.
    - rsynnott 13y ago
      > Most of the situations in the article are pretty much innocent, but feelings provoked in her aren't. Huh? Pretty much none of them are remotely innocent. They range from unprofessional to gross misconduct to potentially illegal.
      - greenrd 13y ago
        Reverting someone's commits "silently" (inasmuch as you can do anything silently in git!) is any of those? That's interesting, because my commits were once "silently" reverted at a previous workplace and then when I queried it, it was explained that I was the one in the wrong. Because I had made a commit without discussing it first and without understanding what I was doing. (I would have discussed it first, but the developer concerned was on holiday at the time.) What I'm saying is, there's a possibility that it wasn't unprofessional. Some might argue what was unprofessional at both employers (GitHub and my previous one) was not having an iron policy that all commits must be code reviewed by another person. But that's a policy issue.
        rsynnott 13y ago
        There's a _possibility_ that it was just that suddenly after the failed come-on, her commits suddenly needed a lot of reverting (though you'd think Github, of all companies, would have decent policies on communicating on changes; silent reversion is not normal and is likely to cause a lot of confusion). However, it allegedly started happening _after_ the failed come-on, which would make it retaliatory. That's unprofessional, and probably amounts to gross misconduct.
  - baddox 13y ago
    I have no evidence that she is lying, but people having definitely lied about much bigger things than this.
almosnow 13y ago
hahaha unbelievable
camus2 13y ago
so long.
sudhirj 13y ago
But why? Despite it's dubious origins, Github remains an excellent / superior product. One may not agree with the way they do things (and even that seems to be some, not everyone in the organization), but is that really a reason to stop using the product? https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic
- kaoD 13y ago
  He's not judging the product good or bad. He's just "voting" the company with his actions, as we all should.
  - Crito 13y ago
    Well that doesn't make sense. Unless he's randomly voting without consideration, then of course he evaluated the various options and "judged" them. That's rather the point of voting, isn't it?
  - robobro 13y ago
    Judgement made out of ignorance cannot be made in good faith.
- eruditely 13y ago
  As usual, the people pushing logical fallacies are the ones making the most of it. You do not want to reward people of the origin product because they are mis-behaving, so you are hoping to create negative incentives/tradeoffs for such behavior. In the cited example on that website, it says Accused on the 6 o'clock news of corruption and taking bribes, the senator said that we should all be very wary of the things we hear in the media, because we all know how very unreliable the media can be." Except in this one it goes, 6oclockCorp->generality of media. In this one, it is Github->Github, especially cause 'founder' is here. That said I think leaving github is a pretty dumb idea considering that comparatively they are the good kids overall.
- retrogradeorbit 13y ago
  What makes it superior to something like bitbucket? I'll answer that for you. Nothing. It's not superior at all. It was just first.
yarou 13y ago
That seems like a knee-jerk reaction. We don't know what has really happened, and we've only heard one side of the story. It seems like these days people are just looking for something to be upset about.
csense 13y ago
See my comments earlier in this thread. It seems unfair to blame Github as a company for the actions of a couple individuals.
- Deestan 13y ago
  It makes sense to question the company's structure/policy/organization if it allows destructive behavior to run wild.

Ryel 13y ago

LOL

iwasphone 13y ago

Isn't it better to wait until all sides of the story have been told?

iancarroll 13y ago
The likelihood she's lying is next to zero. You don't really make these things up...
- iwasphone 13y ago
  HN really needs a reply bot that links to the appropriate wikipedia article on logical fallacies.
  - LockeWatts 13y ago
    I think that would just get out of hand. Also, HN being all human comments is actually rather refreshing, compared to the rest of the Internet.
  - baddox 13y ago
    What fallacy would that comment even be? It's just a factually incorrect statement.
- Crito 13y ago
  I hope you understand that the truth is not simply a matter of if somebody is lying or not. Recollections can be flawed. Perceptions may be biased. Knowledge of other factors may be limited. Events or circumstances may be unintentionally unconsidered or mentioned. There is always value in hearing the take of other people, even when you are an involved party (and therefore able to be certain that you are not lying).
- thesz 13y ago
  She don't need to lie, she can talk about her feelings. Most of the situations in the article are pretty much innocent, but feelings provoked in her aren't. You cannot verify or falsify feelings. They can have different plausible origins. She present one origin, you say she is right. Yes, her side is plausible. The worst thing here is that some of the origins can be offending to some of participants. You chose side that offends Github team.
  - rsynnott 13y ago
    > Most of the situations in the article are pretty much innocent, but feelings provoked in her aren't. Huh? Pretty much none of them are remotely innocent. They range from unprofessional to gross misconduct to potentially illegal.
    - greenrd 13y ago
      Reverting someone's commits "silently" (inasmuch as you can do anything silently in git!) is any of those? That's interesting, because my commits were once "silently" reverted at a previous workplace and then when I queried it, it was explained that I was the one in the wrong. Because I had made a commit without discussing it first and without understanding what I was doing. (I would have discussed it first, but the developer concerned was on holiday at the time.) What I'm saying is, there's a possibility that it wasn't unprofessional. Some might argue what was unprofessional at both employers (GitHub and my previous one) was not having an iron policy that all commits must be code reviewed by another person. But that's a policy issue.
      - rsynnott 13y ago
        There's a _possibility_ that it was just that suddenly after the failed come-on, her commits suddenly needed a lot of reverting (though you'd think Github, of all companies, would have decent policies on communicating on changes; silent reversion is not normal and is likely to cause a lot of confusion). However, it allegedly started happening _after_ the failed come-on, which would make it retaliatory. That's unprofessional, and probably amounts to gross misconduct.
- baddox 13y ago
  I have no evidence that she is lying, but people having definitely lied about much bigger things than this.

almosnow 13y ago

hahaha unbelievable

camus2 13y ago

so long.

sudhirj 13y ago

But why? Despite it's dubious origins, Github remains an excellent / superior product. One may not agree with the way they do things (and even that seems to be some, not everyone in the organization), but is that really a reason to stop using the product? https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic

kaoD 13y ago
He's not judging the product good or bad. He's just "voting" the company with his actions, as we all should.
- Crito 13y ago
  Well that doesn't make sense. Unless he's randomly voting without consideration, then of course he evaluated the various options and "judged" them. That's rather the point of voting, isn't it?
- robobro 13y ago
  Judgement made out of ignorance cannot be made in good faith.
eruditely 13y ago
As usual, the people pushing logical fallacies are the ones making the most of it. You do not want to reward people of the origin product because they are mis-behaving, so you are hoping to create negative incentives/tradeoffs for such behavior. In the cited example on that website, it says Accused on the 6 o'clock news of corruption and taking bribes, the senator said that we should all be very wary of the things we hear in the media, because we all know how very unreliable the media can be." Except in this one it goes, 6oclockCorp->generality of media. In this one, it is Github->Github, especially cause 'founder' is here. That said I think leaving github is a pretty dumb idea considering that comparatively they are the good kids overall.
retrogradeorbit 13y ago
What makes it superior to something like bitbucket? I'll answer that for you. Nothing. It's not superior at all. It was just first.

yarou 13y ago

That seems like a knee-jerk reaction. We don't know what has really happened, and we've only heard one side of the story. It seems like these days people are just looking for something to be upset about.

csense 13y ago

See my comments earlier in this thread. It seems unfair to blame Github as a company for the actions of a couple individuals.

Deestan 13y ago
It makes sense to question the company's structure/policy/organization if it allows destructive behavior to run wild.