Node.js forks again – this time it's a war of words over anti-sex-pest codes of conduct

Re: "there are downsides to codes of conduct"

The guy rejects the SJW straight-jacket some of the other board members want all contributors to wear, so that of course constitutes 'harassment.'

"If you break any of our many, many rules you will be labeled a harasser and expelled. Ditto if you complain about the rules!!"

Re: "there are downsides to codes of conduct"

Of course the emphasis on the harassment narrative deliberately misses the point. The man expressed the opinion that COCs may have downsides, given that they are often written vaguely and have been used by the perpetually offended to police private, unrelated opinions that are in no way, shape or form harmful to anyone, but that were merely classed as "offensive" because they diverged from the narrow views held by those so offended.

To be frank, the response proves him right.

Anon for reasons that should be obvious.

Re: "there are downsides to codes of conduct"

Dunno about the harassment thing but I make it a point not to contribute to projects with these sorts of guidelines. Adults who aren't sociopaths should be able to resolve any issue that might arise in any project of any size.

The root problem here is the corporatisation of Open Source (my skin crawls just thinking about that concept) and the associated fear of "bad PR". If your project has a cancer, cut it out, you don't need endless lists of rules to remove people who are obviously causing an infection in your org - in fact I'd argue that they slow it down.

Hence why I don't contribute to such projects. It's inevitable that they'll all kill themselves by tying themselves in knots like the BBC does or driving way contributing contributors - if you follow this stuff 80% of the people who care about this enough to make a lot of noise are what I call non-contributing contributors, which is to say they don't write code and don't have any strong links to projects as users - they patrol github trying to make life difficult for the sake of making life difficult - we used to call them trolls; how times have changed. Not to say all of them are but certainly a significant proportion are.

Re: "there are downsides to codes of conduct"

> participation in our project and our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body size, disability, ethnicity, gender identity and expression, level of experience, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation

Shirley it should include the full harassment free experience whether one pads left or right

/I'll grab my coat

Re: "there are downsides to codes of conduct"

We're talking about labels here. Is someone a "strong leader" or "a dictator". Is it Theresa May's "Government" or "Regime" ?

I know what it's like when one of the best people in a team is also one of the worst. It's very distressing. However some of the things they are attacking him on are biased. If he was an SJW rather than an MRA then expressing those views whilst representing the company would be OK with them. It's not so much he expresses strong views but that these are the wrong views.

Re: "there are downsides to codes of conduct"

"Come harass me, I'll show you my code of conduct - right in your face".

That challenge looks very much like harrassment.

"Someone said something someone else didn't like. And another someone else defended their right to say it..."

Weeelllll, not quite. The article is glossing over a few key points and getting away with it because it does link to the whole story. Unsurprising, as a good old "SJW" story is excellent clickbait.

First and foremost, there wasn't only one issue at question. Rod has something of a history of being inflammatory, and has regularly been accused of abusing his own powers to shut down debate he doesn't like. That was the crux of this issue.

Additionally there were some fairly detailed byelaw-based arguments about whether or not Rod was even entitled to be in the role he's in. The NodeJs Foundation is pay-to-play so there's some rules in place to balance paid-for access versus actually valuable access.

And *then* we come to the article, which must be put in context of extended flame wars with nodeJS community members, including image capturing and posting otherwise-private messages, inviting others to pile in with personal attacks.

All round a pretty messy, unprofessional business for everyone involved. Rod for being as abrasive as he is, and the Node project for refusing to follow their own rules (whether or not you agree with those rules).

As for this article, glossing over the actually very serious issues about how open source projects should be governed, how you balance professionalism vs inclusivity and how you widen access without diluting excellence in favour of ranting about the SJWs is poor form.

Hmm...

"Would someone call a grown up please?"

Quite frankly I can't help wonder if the project isn't better off without those guys. I mean... Sure, I get it that someone sometimes doesn't like someone else. It happens. But why would comments made on Twitter (or anywhere else for that matter) affect how you're working together within a project in the first place?

But the main reason why I think the project is better off is because of how this ended. People asked for a vote, got it, people voted, they lost. And instead of taking their loss and respecting the majority vote they're now bailing out.

I realize that we probably got a brief cover of the incident or maybe somewhat of a one sided story at best but... meh...

How did that song go again? "o/~ You can't, always get, what you want... o/~".

Re: Yawn

I wasn't able to track down exactly what he said that was so bad, but I infer that it has to do with the very politically correct set of conduct rules imposed on the Node contributors. It wasn't enough to have some minimal rules of decorum. No, someone felt it necessary to add references and protection to every social justice cause currently on the "approved list," and probably a few more just to be sure.

Slowly the smothering wet blanket of the Left gets wrapped around each segment of society, and when the more independently minded complain? Well, sure is handy to have a lot of strict rules to wield against such bigots, ain't it?

Re: Just the tech please

It's not even an overall American disease. This comes almost entirely from California - the place where all these articles on the reg have also emerged in the last year. The recent recruits in that San Francisco office have turned this place into a bloody swamp of onanistic clickbait rubbish.

Re: Just the tech please

> I definitely don't want American identity politics in my tech.

Neither do most of us Americans.

Re: Normal differences, nothing to see here.

> do the curly brackets go on the same line

Let's not go there. Just don't.

Re: Normal differences, nothing to see here.

“People need to realise that we are all different and driven by different things.”

Why does this remind me of the Team America “There are Arseholes and Dicks” speech?

Re: Normal differences, nothing to see here.

Seriously though - grow up, quit whining, write some code or shut up - pick any one of the four.

I wish it were that simple. If code spoke for itself, that would be fine. The problem is I've watched women who wrote very good code indeed be driven out by men who either (a) saw them as potential sex partners, or (b) were angry that chicks were getting into their boys' club. Some women actually take male aliases because their code isn't committed if they submit it under female names.

There is a hell of a lot of misogyny in tech, and it's perpetuated by guys who think that anything that questions male domination is "political correctness" or "virtue signaling." The idea that open source is a meritocracy is a convenient fiction that people who have won the game tell themselves, so they can believe they won it fair and square.