
Charles Nutter of JRuby Banned by Rubinius for Harassment - sandGorgon
http://rubinius.com/2016/01/15/banning-mr-nutter-for-repeated-harassment/
======
chippy
Interesting "Mr. Nutter inserted himself into a public Twitter conversation"
means replying to a tweet that was @ directed to him? He was explicitly
invited to participate in the conversation. I'm confused here. That seems like
a very wide stretch, right? He was replying normally, not "butting in" to
someone else's conversation, it seems to me.

Now, I don't know what else has happened in the ten years, as I don't follow
ruby drama, and only this isolated (and frankly it's very weak on its own)
episode is given. I do wonder though, as this blog post mentions, if this
decision was tied up with the introduction of the Code of Conduct. For
example: Want to ban someone -> install code of conduct -> ban someone.

So, instead of a code of conduct being a guideline for good behaviour, instead
of implementing one as a positive change for the community, its could have
been written and implemented just to target and exclude one individual. I'm
guessing here, of course, but the CoC was written a little only 2 months ago I
think, and it does seem like Mr Nutter was in his bad books for over 10 years.
We cannot know. I'd guess that you wouldn't need a Code of Conduct to ban
someone, right?

If you run the project you should be free to control who contributes. My query
is with Codes of Conduct as a tool of power. I wonder about Codes of Conducts
as a form of control, rather than diversity and inclusiveness. It can be used
to exclude and make people feel less welcome - it can be a powerful weapon for
good and ill. The document does not make those who enforce it good or evil.

------
loki49152
Is this supposed to make Charles Nutter look bad? It actually makes the poster
look unhinged. The poster can't possibly ban Nutter from "any discussion of
Rubinius on any public forum". That's a deeply insane thing to believe one can
demand.

~~~
chippy
Further he was accused of "inserting himself into a public Twitter
conversation" where the very screenshots in this blog show that he was
replying to a tweet directed @ him. He was included into the conversation by
someone else and did not "insert himself"

------
dekz
The context of the tweet seems to be about Rubinius' versioning, to me, it is
crazy. Not knowing if your prod 2.10 is the same as your local development
2.10, absolutely bonkers.

    
    
      > In Rubinius, a "version" is a label on a git commit. To find exactly which commit (uniquely identified by its SHA) the version labels, you deference the corresponding git tag. [1]
    

Rubinius is so unwavering about their versioning process that they have asked
to be removed from dev tools like rbenv and chruby. [2]

@brixen then offers conflicting statements on where he stands with regards to
this:

Advocating removal:

    
    
      > Honestly, given the amount of time I've wasted with rbenv, RVM, and chruby bugs and insisting on telling me how Rubinius should build and package, it would be better if none of them installed Rubinius. [3]
    

Denying removal:

    
    
      > I didn't request that Rubinius be removed; that's @sstephenson's revisionism... [4]
    

[1]: [https://github.com/rbenv/ruby-
build/pull/860#issuecomment-16...](https://github.com/rbenv/ruby-
build/pull/860#issuecomment-168360699)

[2]: [https://github.com/rbenv/ruby-
build/issues/862#issuecomment-...](https://github.com/rbenv/ruby-
build/issues/862#issuecomment-168238467)

[3]: [https://github.com/rbenv/ruby-
build/pull/860#issuecomment-16...](https://github.com/rbenv/ruby-
build/pull/860#issuecomment-168059883)

[4]: [https://github.com/rbenv/ruby-
build/issues/862#issuecomment-...](https://github.com/rbenv/ruby-
build/issues/862#issuecomment-168359473)

    
    
      > Of course, choosing to build a system with a fundamental flaw in it is something they are perfectly free to do

------
_pmf_
I'm actually a bit dizzy from shaking my head.

~~~
mbfg
So Nutter saying that having N versions called X.Y is silly, is what got him
banned? Did I read that right? Let's hope the other 'abuse' was more
tractable.

