
Open Source Initiative bans co-founder, Eric S Raymond - sabas_ge
https://lunduke.com/posts/2020-03-9-b/
======
nrclark
I've read a bunch of ESR's writing, and I disagree with him on an awful lot of
political and social issues. Chances are we wouldn't get along very well.

Tone-policing, cancel culture, and identity politics are a real problem
though, and it seems like they're getting out of hand. This is happening
everywhere though - it's not unique to the open source world at all.

I don't know what the right solution is.

ESR and RMS (who recently got removed from the FSF) helped create the open-
source movement that we have today. And they both were instrumental
popularizing the hacker counter-culture that dominated Linux during its rise
to prominence.

Would I like them as people? Maybe. Probably not. I don't know. It seems wrong
to marginalize them and cast them aside though, even if they're socially
awkward or say the wrong thing sometimes.

~~~
nemo44x
It's just a power grab and has gone on forever in many forms. Redefine
language and classify certain language as non-compliant under the guise of
whatever it is that works to your advantage. Then use this to create systemic
policy to dictate towards your goals and ultimately control whatever resource
it is you were trying to colonize or acquire.

Language is power and can greatly influence and define what masses of people
think about their world view and their experience. Those who get to define
which language is "appropriate" and which is not have a certain power to take
as they please. "Tone-policing", "cancel culture", and "identity politics"
aren't unique in the sense that they are designed to seize power, as this is a
tale as old as time. It's a strategy that proponents believe will help their
in-group and followers acquire and maintain power over cultural resources.

I'm not saying this example is good, bad, or neutral - just what it is: Using
language to project influence and power and take the cultural resources you
want.

~~~
asveikau
Why do you consider it a power grab sooner than, say, people acting in good
faith who really believe in their stated values?

~~~
mikekchar
For me, personally, it would be easier to accept a good faith answer if they
explained what "sharp tone" led to the expulsion. I mean, I can completely
understand if threats were made, or if disparaging comments against protected
categories (i.e. sexist, racist, etc comments). Or hate speech, or content
that is clearly against policy (i.e. links to pornography). Personal attacks,
doxing, stalking, extended periods of harassment etc, etc, etc. There are lots
of things that people get banned for and it's pretty easy to say what they
are.

Banning someone because they vehemently disagree with you? I mean, that's the
only thing I can parse from their statement. It's basically saying, "I do not
wish to discuss things with you, so you are banned".

The funny thing is, I don't think that's inherently wrong. In any group, I
think you should be able to choose your friends. If you don't want to hang out
with someone, then that sucks for that person, but lots of things in life
suck. However, banning the co-founder because you no longer wish to talk to
them is pretty much the definition of a power grab ;-)

~~~
latk
ESR was not banned for having the wrong opinion – many others expressed
similar opinions both before and after his messages. But ESR, over the course
of a few days where he returned to the mailing list, was increasingly unable
to express those opinions in a professional manner.

While the moderators never stated their rationale, an unfortunate combination
of off-list and on-list replies leaked one of ESR's blocked emails[1] although
there were possibly others. Given the context of the discussion, ESR is not
only deeply unprofessional here, but also making personal attacks against
Coraline Ada Ehmke. Disagreement is OK, attacks are not.

And as Gil notes in that email, how ESR is promoting his cause is actually
hurting and undermining open source, not rescuing it. I'd add that such
attacks are even more unacceptable when they come from an ex-President or
Cofounder.

If I had been the moderator to make that call, I'd even have considered
banning ESR without any particular evidence. That guy isn't new to the scene
but has a long history of troublesome behavior. Even his first message upon
return did not provide anything new to the discussion, so there was no reason
to believe that keeping him around would provide any value to anyone. When his
messages were largely brushed off (because they contributed no novel points
aside from BeInG wRiTtEn By ThE cOfOuNdEr) that only seemed to encourage him
to get more extreme, thus running straight into a ban. If not after that
message, surely after the next.

[1]: [http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists....](http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/021328.html)

~~~
CRConrad
So, you’re saying “toxic loonytoon” is what got him banned?

And the same adversary behind it as behind so many other similar bannings and
near-bannings over the last few years. Does this person actually contribute
anything _besides_ tone policing to the many communities they tone police?

It's beginning to feel like his characterization may well be defensible on the
grounds of truthfulness.

~~~
NotSammyHagar
maybe it was ratf*cker. He then going off saying if you don't let me say my
words, the world is doomed. It seems it wasn't the first time he did this.

------
chx
> They have already had an alarming degree of success at this through the
> institution of "Codes of Conduct" on many projects. This has led to the
> expulsion of productive contributors for un-PCness; it's not just a problem
> in theory.

Talk to me.

Seriously, you can not talk about this topic without talking to me because you
are talking about me anyways. (And no, ESR never reached out to me.)

I have been, by any measure, the most prolific code contributor to the Drupal
project for many years, 2005-2012 at least, maybe a year or two more even.

I have been banned from the Drupal project for Code Of Conduct violations in
2016.

It shattered me. They have been _right to do so_.

Relevant blog posts:

[https://medium.com/@chx/women-of-drupal-ive-failed-you-
and-i...](https://medium.com/@chx/women-of-drupal-ive-failed-you-and-i-am-
sorry-fa22f37801b5) (I just updated this with an archive.org link to a post
that is now absent from its original place.)

[https://medium.com/@chx/a-note-from-an-open-source-lead-
deve...](https://medium.com/@chx/a-note-from-an-open-source-lead-developer-
who-got-banned-from-his-community-due-to-code-of-conduct-22d8f066ab9e) this
specifically deals with meritocracy and this post is the most important: you
need to understand it's not about some abstract PC-ness it's about driving
people away. Do read [https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/blog/2018/a-case-
study-in...](https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/blog/2018/a-case-study-in-not-
being-a-jerk-in-open-source) about how to formulate a message without this
sort of language.

And now I am back with a much diminished role [https://medium.com/@chx/here-
we-go-again-not-quite-a9d52ad93...](https://medium.com/@chx/here-we-go-again-
not-quite-a9d52ad93200) and life is good again.

~~~
ofrzeta
It's quite interesting to read the last paragraph on that page that lists your
offenses.

"We are now looking forward to Linus Torvalds to be shown the door from the
Linux project. He has long steered it abusively and has even been identified
on mass media publications as a verbally insulting jerk. Him being a white
male, the epitome of exclusivity, is just the cherry on top."

That sure sounds like someone on a mission (also caring a lot about other
people's business).

Also (as someone occasionally working with Drupal 8) I found it interesting
that commenting on the routing/menu system was one of the reasons that got you
kicked out. Although I could not find any of the alleged "comments ... aimed
at" Larry Garfield. On a side note this was obviously before Garfield himself
was removed from the Drupal community about a year later due to violation of
the code of conduct.

~~~
chx
First, to quote myself:

> Due to repeated Code Of Conduct violations two years ago I was banned from
> Drupal. This story is known and frankly, not worth a damn discussing it
> again. It’s only a background.

Second, let me state this extremely clearly and forcefully: it was better for
the community and at the end of the day, for myself, to ban me at the end of
2016. It is absolutely pointless and a fruitless waste of time trying to
dissect the specifics leading up to that (especially for people who were not
part of the community and can't remember how it was -- and frankly, why should
anyone remember? Almost all of this is 5+ years ago.). And despite it gave me
an opportunity to grow as a person, it is still a wound that hurts prying into
so I respectfully ask not to.

and

> We are now looking forward to Linus Torvalds to be shown the door from the
> Linux project

This was a joke. Nonetheless, Linus was seen industry wide as a jerk (again
check [https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/blog/2018/a-case-study-
in...](https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/blog/2018/a-case-study-in-not-being-
a-jerk-in-open-source) ) and a few months after that blog post, Linus stepped
away for a month and a CoC was established -- how effective that all was,
well,
[https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/6/13/1892](https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/6/13/1892)
and for the consequences of such behavior see [https://lwn.net/ml/linux-
fsdevel/20200217001153.GE10776@drea...](https://lwn.net/ml/linux-
fsdevel/20200217001153.GE10776@dread.disaster.area/)

~~~
yencabulator
> This was a joke.

That makes it worse. Some people's "jokes" are allowed, some are punished by
censoring and expulsion. Selective enforcement is a central part of the
criticism toward CoCs.

~~~
chx
I am getting really exasperated, every time this topic comes up there are
always some who presumes the worst of ... I do not know who but someone who
just wants to use the CoC as a tool to censor and expell people. It doesn't
work that way. It doesn't. It never did, it's not about that. It's about
making everyone feel safe and welcome. I tried to explain and I feel you
didn't read and just parrot the usual bro words. Did you read my blog posts?

Really, come now, I have grown up behind the Iron Curtain, do you think I
don't know what censorship is?

~~~
zozbot234
It's not about what's being presumed, but _what the effects are, out there in
the real world_. The CoC's that people are finding highly problematic in
practice (such as the so-called "Contributor's Covenant", a misnomer if there
ever was one) are _not_ being advocated as generic statements that "everyone
[should] feel safe and welcome"; they're supposed to act as bright-line
rulesets that _everyone_ , both contributors and maintainers, should
ultimately be bound by and actively enforce. For such a ruleset to be so
transparently vulnerable to abuse as a "tool to censor and expell people" is a
_critical_ weakness, _no matter if that abuse was originally predicted or not;
no matter if it was intended or not_.

Having NO "bright-line" CoC whatsoever is preferable by far to having one
which makes a project utterly unmanageable in the face of bad actors. This is
not rocket surgery; it's simply astounding to me that some people can simply
fail to see these problems when they are so clearly apparent to everyone else.

~~~
chx
Did. you. read. my. blog. post. [https://medium.com/@chx/a-note-from-an-open-
source-lead-deve...](https://medium.com/@chx/a-note-from-an-open-source-lead-
developer-who-got-banned-from-his-community-due-to-code-of-
conduct-22d8f066ab9e)

> Having NO "bright-line" CoC whatsoever is preferable by far to having one
> which makes a project utterly unmanageable in the face of bad actors.

The only bad actors here are people spouting nonsense like this. It doesn't
happen. Show me the open source project that because unmanageable because they
enforced their CoC.

~~~
zozbot234
> Did. you. read. my. blog. post.

Exactly. You state that reporting a bug/potential feature, or issuing a pull
request, are inherently "confrontational" processes, but this is far from the
truth in well-managed projects. And to the extent that it has become so, it's
_precisely_ because of procedural roadblocks like CoC's. CoC's make it so
project maintainers can no longer use effective moral suasion to require of
all contributors to be _less_ confrontational and keep professionalism and the
goodness of the project as their shared, common goals.

Their hands are tied; they are now _only_ allowed to act as enforcers of a
legalistic "code" that focuses on punishing perceived discrimination against a
laundry list of overtly-acknowledged ("protected") groups - even the
perception of such _outside_ project spaces! - but leaves literally everything
else as a toxic free-for-all where the loudest and most obnoxious trolls win,
and the maintainer's hard-won wisdom and judgment ultimately counts for
nothing. And that's only the _slightest_ of problems with the most common
CoC's; other issues are far more serious.

~~~
chx
> Exactly. You state that reporting a bug/potential feature, or issuing a pull
> request, are inherently "confrontational" processes

Well, don't stop there, the exact quote is

> all these bug trackers, issue queues, mailing lists are inherently
> confrontational spaces. Someone consideres contributing, OK? They write a
> patch, and what happens? They need to compete at least for the attention of
> others .

> in well-managed projects.

Show me the well managed projects which are not short on reviewers.

~~~
zozbot234
You think projects like Linux are _short_ on maintainers and reviewers? They
even have _multiple_ maintainers for the same pieces of code, each keeping
their own, preferred version of the kernel "tree". And this is an inherently-
scalable process, that only needs new, prospective sub-maintainers to
demonstrate good judgment in "signing off" incoming patches. Many eyes making
all bugs shallow, to user a rather well-known (and relevant!) turn of phrase.

~~~
chx
> And this is an inherently-scalable process

If this thread didn't already include [https://lwn.net/ml/linux-
fsdevel/20200217001153.GE10776@drea...](https://lwn.net/ml/linux-
fsdevel/20200217001153.GE10776@dread.disaster.area/) titled "FS Maintainers
Don't Scale" ... from someone much, much more qualified to judge that topic
than either of us unless of course you are also a kernel maintainer because
the author of that email sure is.

Of course this is nothing new. For example,
[https://opensource.com/business/16/10/linux-kernel-
review](https://opensource.com/business/16/10/linux-kernel-review) also at
[https://lwn.net/Articles/703005/](https://lwn.net/Articles/703005/)

[http://sei.pku.edu.cn/~zhmh/linux.pdf](http://sei.pku.edu.cn/~zhmh/linux.pdf)
is a scientific paper stating, among other things, "In summary, adding more
maintainers to a file yields only a power of 1/2 increase in productivity,
thus, four parallel maintainers are needed to double the overall output. This
suggests limits to the scalability that can be achieved by adding multiple
maintainers to the same files."

~~~
zozbot234
> also at [https://lwn.net/Articles/703005/](https://lwn.net/Articles/703005/)

Um, that article includes quotes stating that cautiously expanding commit
rights to the submaintainer's tree can help solve this scalability problem?
And the more recent email you quote says this about the underlying reason this
sometimes fails (and the lead developer can't cope with incoming patch volume,
thus tending to burn out in the process - this is the "can't scale" they're
talking about):

"...they [others] don't want to do it because they are scared of making a
mistake and being yelled at by Our Mighty Leaders. That is a result of the
fact that a Linux Maintainer is seen as a _powerful position_ because of the
_control and influence_ it gives that person. It's also treated like an
exclusive club (e.g. invite-only conferences for Maintainers) ... How many
people do you know who have voluntarily given up a Maintainer position because
they really didn't want to do it or they thought someone else could do a
better job?"

So I fail to see how contentiousness and being _more_ confrontational than not
is helping there. The linux-kernel developers are in fact doing a pretty good
job of _not_ yelling at the real newcomers (which is what most people calling
for CoC's usually focus on) yet the newcomers' patches still go unreviewed.
And fiddling with rules of conduct is supposed to change this for the better,
how? The more you do that, the _less_ maintainers will be inclined to renounce
their formally-acknowledged influence over the project.

~~~
chx
You are constantly moving the goalposts. I have tried to challenge your
position of the Linux kernel not having enough maintainers stating the
maintainer system is not as scalable as you say. I even found a scientific
paper studying this.

You acknowledged nothing of this, rather singled out one email and spout
nonsense:

> So I fail to see how contentiousness and being more confrontational than not
> is helping there.

What the hell, everything I talked about up to now is being LESS
confrontational.

This was my last reply, don't bother replying to me, I am not engaging
further. This was a waste of my time.

------
sneak
I’m torn on this.

On one hand, esr has a point. There is a credible argument that cancel culture
has gone too far, and that expressing disagreement itself is now becoming
dangerous as those with whom you disagree will take the opportunity to play
victim and attempt to defame you simply for disagreeing. Identity politics
along these lines have lately become unproductive and distracting. I generally
don’t participate in groups that permit that sort of thing. There’s a real
problem afoot.

On the other hand, esr is a real jerk. Real jerks in f/oss are also a real
problem. f/oss groups should ABSOLUTELY eject bullies: not for wrongthink, but
for bullying. We must be kind.

I think the solution is to continue to repeat his warning message, but also to
eject him and any other bullies like him. (Including those who bully with the
extreme-PC victimization hammer.)

One can fight excessive-SJWing and remain kind and considerate to others
whilst doing so.

~~~
derefr
> Real jerks in f/oss are also a real problem. f/oss groups should ABSOLUTELY
> eject bullies: not for wrongthink, but for bullying. We must be kind.

So, is it illegitimate, then, to have a FOSS project with an
intentional/cultivated "culture of abuse", where the idea is that nobody is
kind to anybody and that's how everybody likes it? Sort of a... "BSDM but we
build something along the way" thing? (For example, picture "Twitch Plays
Pokemon" but, rather than a game, the peanut gallery is "playing" an IDE.)

I mean, it's not like every FOSS project needs to be treated as a serious
attempt at being productive above all else, right? Fundamentally, for a lot of
people, FOSS is a hobby of theirs, and if some people want to do whips-and-
chains FOSS as a hobby, I don't see why anyone needs to butt in between them
doing so.

Which gets to a deeper point: does FOSS imply open membership? It doesn't
obviously in the case where it's a one-author library; but beyond that, things
seem sort of fuzzy right now. You'd think it could be made clear which
projects are "for joining", and which projects are more in the vein of "you
can certainly fork it, but our own version will stay exactly what we, the
static set of existing maintainers, want, and nothing else." Where in the
latter case, the culture of the project doesn't really matter to anyone but
the existing static set of maintainers, because it's not like anyone else is
going to be exposed to it but them.

~~~
duskwuff
> So, is it illegitimate, then, to have a FOSS project with an
> intentional/cultivated "culture of abuse", where the idea is that nobody is
> kind to anybody and that's how everybody likes it? Sort of a... "BSDM but we
> build something along the way" thing?

It's nonviable for anything beyond a small hobby project, for the simple
reason that such a culture would make it essentially impossible for anyone to
participate in the project as a representative of their employer.

~~~
derefr
That assumes a monolithic design style, I think.

There are a lot of projects that are factored into small pieces with separate
maintainership, where the project as a whole—or its "core"—might be corporate-
sponsored; yet individual parts/plugins/connectors—including fairly-critical
ones!—might turn out to be one person's hobby-project.

How many maintainers do you think the average Kafka connector has? The average
Postgres extension? The average Redis or Nginx module? Etc.

These ecosystem components move the project-as-a-whole forward, and yet they
don't necessarily need to be as "corporate" as the project-as-a-whole does to
accomplish that. Even though, in the end, a corporation might use one of them,
it won't really matter as long as nobody sees them doing so. (If they ever
need to patch the un-corporate extension, though, they'll probably fork the
thing and flense out all references to the original. I've seen that happen a
lot, and done it a few times myself.)

------
aeturnum
From the previous discussion, plorkyeran[1] found the email that they suspect
got ESR banned:

[http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists....](http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/021328.html)

I'm not familiar with the culture or standards of the OSI but I don't think
I'd wanna participate in a community where this kind of engagement is normal,
so good for them I suppose?

Edit: replaced plorkyeran's account link with their post. I also now notice
others posted the link, but I saw plorkyeran's post.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22521608](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22521608)

~~~
justinmk
What parts of that email are so objectionable?

~~~
aeturnum
Uh, I suppose the name calling, strawman-ing of arguments and insinuations of
subterfuge.

> toxic loonytoon

> The actual goal of the movement behind the ESD

> banishing contributors for wrongthink

> The "Persona Non Grata" clause is best understood as an attempt to paralyze
> resistance to such political ratfucking

Like I said I don't know the OSI culture (or this context) but nothing about
this message strikes me as someone who's acting in good faith. There's lots of
nonsense out there, but engaging in good faith is about taking what people say
in collaborative environments as given in good faith.

I'm open to being wrong and this tone being appropriate. I don't mean ESR has
to be nice to people he doesn't like outside of the official policy
discussion. But if people are trying to do work this doesn't seem like an
appropriate way to engage.

~~~
josteink
> banishing contributors for wrongthink

And now _he_ is banished.

Are you really arguing against this?

~~~
aeturnum
I think communities have the right to decide on what kind of engagement they
want.

ESR could be acting within the community standards of OSI, in which case I
don't think he should be banned.

I also find the way he engages to be more hostile than I'm comfortable with
and probably wouldn't want to work an environment where it was the norm.

~~~
cosmiccatnap
If you said that at work you would be fired, because nobody can have a
civilized conversation with you and no progress can be made. Nobody is
stopping him from expressing himself in his personal life but if you are going
to bring your crap to work expect there to be consequences.

~~~
catalogia
Some people would be fired if they wore a tshirt to work. I don't think
whether or not a behavior would be tolerated by corporations should be the
measure by which we judge appropriateness in any context other than a
corporate workplace.

------
motohagiography
Making creators accountable to bureaucratic values using cynical techniques
like whisper campaigns and deplatforming will destroy the culture and
technologies it produced.

FOSS was started as a divergence from corporate bureaucratic software, and now
political bureaucracy is coopting and subverting it.

An intolerant minority is poisoning the well of creativity in multiple
disciplines by subverting the organizations that support it instead of
producing the tools people want and use. It's the same crowd that is causing
campus problems. These people aren't civil or "nice," they're nihilists who
understand bureaucratic power and align with whatever meaningless words
achieve their end.

It's not just right/left either, this particular flavor of bureaucracy affects
progressivism, but it's a wave of the same force that hollows out creative
endeavors and turns them into hosts for bureaucratic governance.

The only way to defeat it is individual competence and peer recognition of the
excellence of their work, which people who exploit bureaucracy are necessarily
incapable.

Rant over, but this issue is crucial to everything from net neutrality, crypto
policy and backdoors, and software freedom everywhere. It cannot be allowed to
be shut down.

~~~
antepodius
Or we need a cycle of a band of foul-mouthed non-agreeable assholes breaking
off from the stale norm and creating a programming counterculture that goes on
to revolutionize the world before being taken over by entryists who grind its
culture back in to placid oppressive normalcy, upon which a band of foul-
mouthed non-agreeable assholes break off and...

------
pcj-github
I side with ESR, this is silly.

What I think the moderators should have done in this circumstance is _actually
moderate_. In cases like this where things are getting heated and you're
obviously in an un-usual circumstance, schedule a _real conversation_ to
diffuse the situation. Slack, Zoom, Hangouts, phone call, whatever. Anything
where tone and emotion can be effectively communicated.

Can you do this always? No. Should you do it when you're founding member is at
risk of being banned from the mailing list? Obviously, yes.

This is what happens when people rely too much on email.

~~~
yellowapple
Hell, even a private email chain (i.e. off-list) would be better than nothing.

------
rvz
Once again, another person has been arrested and unfortunately cancelled by
those who disagree with him over wrong-think. The OSI isn't really doing
anyone favours over banning people like ESR because they have an opposing view
over changing the organisation's policy, they just make the whole argument a
one-sided echo-chamber which isn't healthy for any org if one is concerned
about some changes like ESR was.

The cancel-culture attitude over people who you disagree with is so dangerous
to any organisation. It's like it has become a crime on the internet these
days. If someone was to say an opposing opinion with evidence towards a PC
crowd, they will be locked up in the dungeon, charged with high treason and
banished forever.

------
btilly
I am conflicted. I generally despise SJWs and identity politics, but this
couldn't have happened to a nicer person.

Data point. Read
[http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/sextips/](http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/sextips/).

Data point. It took ESR less than 15 minutes from meeting my ex in late 1999
to make an undesired pass at her. (He knew she was married to me, and was
turned down.)

Data point. I was at a PerlMongers meeting in 2003. And happened to remark
that, "Someone needs to tell ESR that he's not God's gift to women." After the
laughter died down, a woman at the table gave an account of his making an
unwanted pass at her. This opened a floodgate as every woman at the table had
her own similar story in turn.

There are many more such data points. But clearly ESR's behavior has been a
problem for a long time.

However I am still deeply concerned that he establishes a convenient precedent
that will be applied to other, much less problematic, people.

~~~
gpanders
> but this couldn't have happened to a nicer person.

I think maybe you meant "couldn't have happened to a more deserving person"?

The way you phrased it implies you think ESR is actually quite a nice person
who didn't deserve what he got, while the remainder of your post clearly shows
that's not what you mean.

~~~
btilly
That is what I meant, and that is what the idiom usually means.

See
[https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/couldn%27t+have+happene...](https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/couldn%27t+have+happened+to+a+nicer+person)
for verification.

~~~
gpanders
> Sometimes used sarcastically when referring to a negative event happening to
> an unpleasant person.

Interesting! I've never heard this used in a sarcastic way. My mistake.

------
Uhhrrr
The enthusiasm for shaming in this mail from the thread makes my stomach turn.
They seem to be either blissfully unaware or malevolently aware that it would
lead to more marginalization, not less:
[https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists...](https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/021285.html)

"This special exception makes clear who the community considers a bad actor
and initially imposes greater obligations on them than anyone else. [....] As
in the Persona non Grata Preamble, this special exception serves as a clear
statement on the community's view on who is welcome in their community.
Additionally, if the bad actor wants to redistribute, they have to distribute
the license shaming them."

~~~
antepodius
There's no greater feeling than the crunch of the bones of the unworthy
beneath your heel.

------
woofie11
I wanted to address one error in this article: "Richard Stallman being
compelled to resign from the Free Software Foundation."

RMS was not compelled to resign from the FSF.

RMS decided to resign since he felt it was for the good of the organization,
and he could no longer be effective there.

While there was a lot of external pressure, there was zero pressure from
within. It was RMS trying to do the right thing.

My major concern about the sequence of events there were external appearances.
It seems that problem materialized.

~~~
kazinator
> _RMS decided to resign since he felt it was for the good of the
> organization, and he could no longer be effective there._

That's just the cover story, and nobody in their right mind buys it.

It was more likely a "you can appear to go spontaneously, or there will be a
big fuss and you will be out anyway".

It's the same old thing like when any public figure "steps down" in the midst
of a scandal. That just means they picked the least unpalatable item from a
menu that was handed to them, so to speak.

RMS had no more real option to stay at the helm of the FSF than he had to keep
that MIT office.

~~~
woofie11
No. I know the personalities involved. It was not a cover story.

------
voldacar
> It's less bad that people sometimes got their feelings hurt than it is to
> institutionalize a means by which dissenting opinions are crushed under the
> rubric of “not nice”.

This is eloquently put. The "fetishization of niceness" he talks about is such
a strange trend to watch. It started in universities but it's like it wants to
eat all of society and social interactions

~~~
jshevek
Worse, it's not actually about being nice. I'm speaking in general and not
about this ESR situation, but subtle forms of bigotry, bullying and
intimidation are often part of the tone policing culture.

------
paweladamczuk
It makes me sad that people are so sensitive that reading a message like the
one ESR wrote drives them away from participating in projects and communities
that otherwise would interest them. At least this seems to be the narrative of
the "PC supporters" here.

The world is full of assholes. I think it's better to get used to it than to
shelter yourself, try to make every space safe or withdraw from interacting
with other people.

I know I'm biased though. I am pretty thick-skinned so it's hard to see it
from the other perspective.

~~~
a1369209993
> It makes me sad that people are so sensitive that reading a message like the
> one ESR wrote drives them away from participating in projects and
> communities that otherwise would interest them.

If it helps, people are not actually like that (or least people that far along
the bell curve are much rarer than you seem to believe). The people you're
seeing are taking (no, I don't mean feigning) offence in a strategic attempt
to shut down someone who disagrees with them politically.

------
shiado
The open source community might want to think long and hard about ceding
control to groups of people that proudly list their mental illnesses in their
twitter bios (like actually, they really fucking do this). I predict a serious
split in open source culture once people realize they have been played by
narcissists seeking power.

~~~
aliakhtar
Uh, what's wrong with listing if you have a mental illness? To me, its no
different than listing any physical illness you're a survivor of.

~~~
jshevek
I don't see a problem with an individual that discloses a mental illness. I do
see a problem with a subculture that celebrates mental illness.

~~~
aliakhtar
Why? Mental illnesses are not a choice, so its not others will start getting
mental illnesses if its celebrated.

But if you're successful despite a mental illness (by any measure of success),
its worth celebrating that so others with that condition can see it can be
overcome. And it'll help reduce stigma.

~~~
antepodius
>so its not others will start getting mental illnesses if its celebrated

If you celebrate mental illness itself, fetishise it, blast out images of
good-looking successful people with SHE'S BIPOLAR next to it, people will
emulate it. It's fashion. It's what we do with everything.

The way mental illnesses are 'discovered' and grouped, as best as I can tell
from what I've heard psychologists talk about it, is by a duck method. If it
looks, talks, walks like depression, we'll call it that. The actual underlying
causal networks are yet mostly mysterious, so they're not the basis of the
defintions. The way they're defined is basically behavioural.

------
esjeon
TBH, cancellers, who pull this kind of "cancel" drama, are no better than
their cancellees. They are actually worse, because they are turning a personal
drama into an organizational drama, rather abruptly. Not to mention that this
process mostly involves ad-hominem, cherry-picking, and non-public decisions.
I mean, these people create a bigger political mess while trying to "clean" a
tiny _irrelevant_ mess. Lame. Unproductive.

------
JohnFen
That's distressing, but unsurprising. I've been watching the OSS community
engaging in slow-motion self-destruction for a while now. This sort of thing
is right in line with that.

------
ringzero
You know, this really sucks for me personally. Not the ban, but the sorts of
things Eric appears to stand for. I read The Cathedral and the Bazaar when I
was 13, and it was probably my gateway into advocating for open source.
Somewhere around that age, I ended up speaking on a panel, among other OSS
advocates, that successfully sold one of the local school divisions on OSS (we
also helped them integrate it, on-site :). To be honest, I don’t quite
remember the book or quite what I thought of it, but I know it had a profound
influence on me at the time.

Then I see Eric write this:

> Usually (and in this case) accompanied by a lot of bafflegab about
> “inclusion” and “diversity” so thay anyone who isn't a fan of the new,
> censorious rules can be cast as some sort of bigot.

:/ Eric, we can have it both ways. I hammer it home into the engineers I’ve
lead that code is the ultimate source of truth. I‘ll guide them from, for
example, “do we need a mutex here” through to object code to generated
assembly through to an intel reference manual, because I want to demonstrate
that as engineers, we are in full control of our creations. The engineers I
work with all challenge each other, and ask difficult questions, and put ideas
through difficult tests. Because we’re mature adults, we can do so with
language more advanced than “this is shit” (an open source favorite). It’s
real easy. How about, “what happens when <state concern>” or “have you
considered <alternate approach>”.

In fact, by soliciting _more_ feedback and criticism, you are being _more_
inclusive - as long as the conversations play out in a constructive way! Yes,
it can be hard to teach that, but that’s why we pay people managers and
technical leads to do a job.

Honestly, though, what sucks most of all is when you see that people who were
so influential to you early in life would apparently look down on the person
you are, just because you would ask to be respected in return.

~~~
pdonis
_> Then I see Eric write this_

You are taking what he wrote out of context and interpreting it to mean
something very different than what he intended.

Eric is not arguing that insults are preferable to dispassionate feedback. (As
I noted in another comment upthread, I have worked with him on a small part of
one of his coding projects, and in that context he is all dispassionate
feedback and no insults whatever. So in actual work he does not exhibit the
bad behavior you describe at all.) He is looking at what is being done to OSI,
and what is being done to open source projects around the world, in the name
of "social justice", and he sees the same game being played that has been
played by the Left for centuries to gain control of institutions and then
completely subvert them from their original purpose. If you don't understand
that historical context, of course you're not going to understand why he is
being so forceful about this. He is not trying to stop people from being
constructive and non-insulting about actually writing good code. He is trying
to stop people whose ultimate agenda has nothing to do with writing good code
from taking over open source projects and ruining them, making us all much
worse off in the process.

~~~
ringzero
I'm gonna quote this part:

> and he sees the same game being played that has been played by the Left for
> centuries to gain control of institutions and then completely subvert them
> from their original purpose

"""Out of context""" that looks _REAL_ similar to a certain other group that
seems to be making a name for themselves in this thread. Glad to know he's a
conspiracy theorist and so are his current followers.

~~~
pdonis
_> that looks REAL similar to a certain other group that seems to be making a
name for themselves in this thread_

Which other group are you referring to? If you're going to make charges of
conspiracy theory, then you shouldn't use innuendo. Just come right out and
say what you mean.

------
pipework
Or we could stop using the things made by people we cancel instead of getting
rid of the people. Cancel culture is about not seeing faces anymore, not
getting better or improving anything.

It's ridiculous to stand atop the work of the people you bury and call
yourself holy for it.

------
silverreads
Anyone unaffiliated with a large commercial organization is being
systematically rooted out and destroyed in the free software community. I'm
honestly ashamed to be a part of this community right now. ESR has done SO
MUCH for us, but doesn't align with a position some wishy washy corporate PR
departments have OK'd, so he's OUT. There is no "be nice" rule in life, and
doubly so for corporate America. This is disgraceful bigotry in action.

~~~
turbinerneiter
Read ESRs blog.

He has gone insane after 9/11\. He thinks homosexuals are pedophile. I have
the cathedral and the Bazaar at home, and I live that book, but he isn't part
of the healthy open source community anymore.

~~~
justinmk
> He thinks homosexuals are pedophile.

Do you have a primary source for that? This sounds like a cancel-culture rumor
intended to attach negative ideas to a person in order to discredit them.

~~~
supernintendo
Straight from the horse's mouth:
[http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=26](http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=26)

~~~
kyleee
After reading that entire post, I believe the above quote that:

"He thinks homosexuals are pedophile[s]"

is false. The rant asserts that homosexuals may be more predisposed to
pedophelia and/or ephebophelia than those who are straight. Though as an
astute commenter on the post pointed out that basically no evidence for the
central thesis was provided by ESR.

------
speakingcode
How is this reply from Josh Berkus NOT doing exactly what he accuses ESR of
doing?? A directed attack on a person's character riddled with accusations and
assumptions about their motive but entirely void of response to any of the
points or topics the person brought up, and a dismissive, alienating assertion
that the person makes no contribution or adds any value, and their absence
will not be felt?

Seems like an attempt to intimidate an opponent and win an argument by making
the opponent afraid (or banned) to participate

>>> ESR's “sharp language” is not an attempt to persuade. It is an attempt to
intimidate opponents; to “win” an argument by making others afraid to
participate. Indeed, even today OSI mailing list composition is entirely folks
with enough privilege to be resistant to personal attacks. That's a sad,
terrible thing. It's not “free speech” when it's an attempt to shout others
down so that they have no voice. It's something else entirely. Further, not
one of ESR's points is original or even original to this list. In his absence,
not one of the ideas he so “colorfully” expressed will be lost. In the
meantime, we're missing the input of so many people who will not participate
in OSI because of our tolerance for wholly uncivilized behavior like his
posts.

------
classics2
Not every contribution, even if useful, is worth the price the contributor
demands.

The way to stop this is to just disregard the contributions of those who’s
asking price is everyone else’s slavish obedience to their standards of
conduct.

------
erulabs
When I was 16 or so I made my very first patch to the KDE project. It was
really awful code - and I was told to kill myself due to its quality. There
are absolutely bullies in FOSS - but I swapped to Gnome and called it a day. I
was pretty upset, but a few months later Postfix accepted a patch so I spent 3
years as a mail administrator. My issue here is the lack of transparency -
just tell us why he was banned. His essay on social politics seems non-
Germaine - it wasn’t aimed at anyone. If he directly insulted harassed or
threatened a contributor - absolutely kick him out - but just copy paste the
text! It’s a fairly low bar to hit for those given the authority to ban
someone from their own creation.

------
vitorbaptistaa
He writes about the reasons behind his expulsion on a post named "The right to
be rude" [1] on his blog. This was written before he was banned.

[1] [http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8609](http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8609)

------
millette
Only 2 months after Perens left
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21958105](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21958105)

------
phaemon
So, does _anyone_ know what exactly he was banned for?

~~~
evv
Here's a previous thread on the topic [1]. From what I can gather, Eric was
arguing against allowing "ethical source" licenses from being designated as
"Open Source" by the institute.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22518370](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22518370)

~~~
kick
That thread is wrong. Unfortunately, for a stupid reason. The OSI removed the
messages from their archive after he got banned. Because removing all evidence
is _totally_ the correct thing to do.

I support getting rid of Raymond, but they couldn't have made themselves come
off worse to your average internet commentator.

~~~
mikestew
_The OSI removed the messages from their archive after he got banned._

Until demonstrated how it might be otherwise, I contend that to be lunacy.
Without a dog in the fight, or frankly much interest, I looked at the thread
to make my own conclusions. I found nothing from ESR that I consider
offensive, and I have _much_ less tolerance for ass-clown behavior than I used
to (coincidentally about the time I started working on becoming less of an
ass-clown myself).

So I walk away thinking, yup, some special dandruff flake got their panties in
a bunch over something silly. Because the message that might have changed my
mind on that, well, it's not visible anymore.

~~~
buckminster
As far as I know this was a natural consequence of their moderation, not a
one-off attempt to edit history.

Anyway, you can read ESR's dodgy message quoted in this post:

[http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists....](http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/021328.html)

------
jshevek
Many people seem to believe that name calling in the form of "toxic loonytoon"
was key to this decision.

Toxic people exist. We must be able to discuss our opinion that someone is
toxic.

"Loonytoon" is indeed a gratuitous insult, but a very mild one. Silly, even.

It doesn't make sense to me that OSI would react so strongly and dramatically
to such a mild insult. I suspect there is another element to this which no one
is discussing.

------
zenlot
> Eric S Raymond: The fetishization of ‘nice’ behavior, where ‘nice’ ends up
> defined as being any behavior some self-appointed censor doesn't like.
> Usually (and in this case) accompanied by a lot of bafflegab about
> “inclusion” and “diversity” so thay anyone who isn't a fan of the new,
> censorious rules can be cast as some sort of bigot.

Pretty much represents HN community too.

------
moomin
If you want to understand ESR, you should read this that he wrote back in
1995:
[http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/dancing.html](http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/dancing.html)

~~~
yellowapple
> Rituals are programs written in the symbolic language of the unconscious
> mind. Religions are program libraries that share critical subroutines. And
> the Gods represent subystems in the wetware being programmed. All humans
> have potential access to pretty much the same major gods because our wetware
> design is 99% shared.

> Only...that cold and mechanistic a way of thinking about the Gods simply
> will not work when you want to evoke one. For full understanding, the
> Apollonian/scientific mode is essential; for direct experience, the
> Dionysian/ecstatic mode is the only way to go.

That resonated surprisingly strongly with me.

------
aidenn0
I do wish that the author had pushed back on ESR's claim that removing CoC is
the correct solution, particularly given the author's claim that nothing he
found in ESRs posts to the list came even close to violating the CoC.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
CoCs are an elaborate legalistic version of a conch shell. ESR wasn't holding
the shell when he spoke.

------
jshevek
ESR discusses this on his blog:

[http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8609](http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8609)

------
luord
It's pretty pathetic that Chestek wasn't able (or allowed) to even mention
_who_ was the "subscriber" that was banned in that email.

Mind you, I disagree with Raymond on quite a few things, but he's clearly far
worthier of being read (at least on OSS matters) than these Chestek and Berkus
persons.

------
6510
I thought about it and its actually funny!

Founding shit like this took a special kind of dinosaur, the kind who
criticizes everything. The self critique being the most important kind. In an
ideal world you can never have enough of that. Sadly for other people, if you
have a lot of it, it is hard not to project it outwards as well. It takes a
great struggle to not subject others to the same standard one holds himself
to. It can be done... until codez of conduct are coined then such person just
explodes - which is funny. Fuzzy little creatures then make a home in the hard
shell they leave behind.

------
vearwhershuh
"The worse, the better." -Nikolay Chernyshevsky

------
m0zg
And that's why political activist infestations should be dealt with quickly
and forcefully, before they get a chance to fester and take over the host.

ESR: "The effect – the intended effect – is to diminish the prestige and
autonomy of people who do the work – write the code – in favor of self-
appointed tone-policers. In the process, the freedom to speak necessary truths
even when the manner in which they are expressed is unpleasant is being
gradually strangled."

Which is what happened in the end.

~~~
pessimizer
The OSI is a political activist organization.

~~~
m0zg
Only if you equate open source advocacy with political activism. In fact their
"about" page states: "Much of OSI’s advocacy takes the form of quiet
persuasion rather than public activism", and the whole thing was founded in
part because the term "free software" seemed too politically charged to the
founders, both of which, BTW, have been ejected.

------
contingencies
_I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it._ \- Evelyn Beatrice Hall, on Voltaire's principles

------
jasoneckert
This is a well-written article on many levels.

Unfortunately, my respect for OSI has bottomed out after reading it.

------
planetzero
How ironic: A person railing against cancel culture gets cancelled by cancel
culture.

Simply disagreeing with politically charged topics gets you a boot from many
open source projects.

Many people that claim to want tolerance, actually want nothing less than
exuberance for their own causes and have no problem painting people they
disagree with as non-human, so they can harass, get them fired from their jobs
or positions (canceling), and then finally silence.

This comes right out of the 'rules for radicals' playbook.

If you can't respect my freedom of speech, why should I protect yours?

~~~
woofyman
> How ironic: A person railing against cancel culture gets cancelled by cancel
> culture.

That’s not ironic. It would be ironic if a supporter of cancel culture got
canceled.

~~~
jjgreen
Like rain, on your wedding day, ...

------
seilrse
I'm just going to leave this here. [https://www.linux-
magazine.com/Online/Blogs/Off-the-Beat-Bru...](https://www.linux-
magazine.com/Online/Blogs/Off-the-Beat-Bruce-Byfield-s-Blog/The-Decline-and-
Fall-of-Eric-S.-Raymond)

More sources:
[https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond)

~~~
tedivm
You don't even need rationalwiki, wikipedia itself has some choice comments-

> In 2015 Raymond accused the Ada Initiative and other women in tech groups of
> attempting to entrap male open source leaders and accuse them of rape,
> saying "Try to avoid even being alone, ever, because there is a chance that
> a 'women in tech' advocacy group is going to try to collect your scalp."

> Raymond has claimed that "Gays experimented with unfettered promiscuity in
> the 1970s and got AIDS as a consequence", and that "Police who react to a
> random black male behaving suspiciously who might be in the critical age
> range as though he is an near-imminent lethal threat, are being rational,
> not racist."

~~~
joana035
What about context?

------
kazinator
What's going on in FOSS these days is that the world of large, multi-national
corporations, as well as governments, has become dependent on FOSS for
critical infrastructure.

These players want volunteers to do free work for them, but otherwise to be in
control.

They can't have some scruffy old ultra-libertarians who speak their mind
running the projects; they want weaklings and pushovers.

To be in control means being able to inject dubious changes into code that are
against the interests of the public. Crypto Backdoors, DRM, vendor-specific
crap, subversions of open standards, you name it.

~~~
cpach
ESR is not only an ultra-libertarian, he’s also a vile scumbag with a
considerably inflated ego.

~~~
eMSF
>ESR is not only an ultra-libertarian

You say that like it's a bad thing...

~~~
cpach
I don’t really care either way TBH. Anarchocapitalism is not my cup of tea but
there are definitely libertarians that I enjoy listening to. My point was that
ESR’s biggest problem area isn’t his ideology of choice but rather his long
list of other undesirable character traits.

------
itamarst
I found one of the emails ([https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists...](https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-
discuss_lists.opensource.org/2020-February/021328.html), at the bottom)

I would ban someone for that. "Toxic loonytoon" is not a productive way to
have a discussion.

(Originally quoted it here but getting formatting right here is terrible).

------
josteink
Does someone have a list of common, non-OSI approved software licenses for
FOSS software?

I might want to relicense some projects I have...

------
armatav
Eventually darwinism will win out.

If the correct way is to censor certain opinions, then naturally organizations
that tend to do that will outcompete organizations that don’t.

And if not, then not.

~~~
odiroot
It took quite a long time for Central and Eastern European countries to escape
the obviously dysfunctional socialist regime. Many people perished waiting for
the collapse.

I'm too not hopeful this time.

To paraphrase, "revolutionaries" can remain irrational longer than the you can
remain alive and willing to contribute.

------
davidgerard
The correct axis to consider this question along is "hostile work
environment".

Because coding is a job, and open source coding is a job these days. And you
are expected to behave in a somewhat professional manner.

ESR's email in any reasonable workplace would lead to a disciplinary hearing.
It was a bad email that should not have been sent.

~~~
zozbot234
An open source maintainer is not your boss. If your work on an open source
project is not being accepted, you can just fork the project and effortlessly
escape any "hostility", while still taking full credit for your coding. The
proposed Persona Non Grata clause actively _creates_ a full-blown "hostile
work environment" problem where none existed before (by _purposely_
obstructing the "freedom to fork" aspect of FLOSS development), so if you're
right it's Ehmke who is doing what you describe, not ESR.

------
LargoLasskhyfv
Let them have it. All. Wait until they fall. Because bikeshedding Gerrit is
not fit for merit. Bitrotten incest is their best. Fork in silent stealth,
away from the screaming masses. Enjoy the silence, and clear air. No obnoxious
gases anymore, just code and score. While THEY have nothing to show, except
screaming fits. Dumb shits!

------
Jare
"I haven't been here for 20 years but I've come to fix all your problems. I
will not be nice while I do that."

In what possible world do you expect such a story to end any other way,
regardless of the forum and people involved?

------
tarkin2
He’s obviously a great when it comes to his contributions over the years. And
he may have a point in his criticisms. But he doesn’t seem in a healthy state
of mind. He seems paranoid - “make no mistake we are under attack” - angry -
“loonytoon”, “ratfucking” - and the victim of a cultural attack -
“journalistically-protected class“. The linked article on here about
homosexual priests seems to suggest it’s been a theme for a while.

~~~
cpach
Yeah it’s pretty obvious that he has issues.

------
rodgerd
Given that the free software world struggles to resolve the relatively simple
moral conundrum of whether or not licenses should require people to share,
adding another layer of moral and ethical concerns on top - around the idea of
trying to define good and bad uses for software - is a heck of an ambitious
problem; as such there's a lot of good arguments for and against a candidate
who wants the OSI to pick up that work.

It's unfortunately that the esr clown show has derailed that with the ravings
of a man who, quite to the contrary of one of his sayings, doesn't contribute
much code and won't shut up; and the rather than introducing any cogent or
interesting thoughts on the topic, has simply sprayed abuse around like an
out-of-control honeywagon. The OSI will be a great deal better off for his
absence.

------
cpach
Oh, lots of ESR fanboys here today! Can someone of you please explain exactly
what it is that makes ESR a great hacker/programmer?

~~~
ForHackernews
Nothing, imho. He maintained the jargon file and some irrelevant old unix
utilities for a while. His primary achievement was non-technical: taking the
radical philosophy of free software and neutering it be acceptable to
corporations. He also wrote a book[0] with a catchy title that many people
referenced and few people read.

I think ESR is a dabbler and popularizer who has built his personal brand
around being a Man-in-Tech rather than a person who actually produces
significant technical contributions. RMS or Torvalds he ain't.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar)

~~~
cpach
IMO you summed it up very well there.

