"Repeated ToC violations by an authority figure went unaddressed."
Not sure what ToC is, but the alleged violations appear to be of Code of Conduct.
Alleged violations are described here: https://twitter.com/ohhoe/status/899748838302302212
Most links are private, but here are the public ones:
Try working on an open source project for 5 years and then we can talk about altruism.
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what the people forking Node here are trying to do, though perhaps not with a particular time limit.
What I see is a screenshot of a GitHub issue (https://twitter.com/ohhoe/status/899748838302302212) which was already redacted and does no longer provide any links. Tweet in support of "anti-CoC article" is there (https://twitter.com/rvagg/status/887652116524707841) but that alone would not assert a "harmful person" in my opinion.
I understand the fork is not on political reasons which may be very well grounded. But I don't think they are not explained to the public well enough. There must be a clear answer to "Why should I care?" but there is not. This will probably lead to ignorance and dismissal.
What it does is highlight how speech codes can be used by the socially hyperfluent to bully and dominate the less fluent, by placing an unreasonable burden on a speaker to have 100% prediction accuracy of every potential negative response.
That SJWs call it a strawman is just another example of how they always refuse to follow their own rules of empathy and inclusion.
I don't see why this is so complicated, other than perhaps it seems SJW types can't fathom the idea that hiring managers are actually capable of talking to a person, getting to know them, and then capable of deciding whether or not they're qualified for the job without checking off a list of what should be considered irrelevant qualifiers.... Skin color, penis girth, propensity for future development of diabeetus, etc.
Also, it's quite clear that you didn't read the memo at all. Maybe the Buzzfeed condensed op-ed on it. Did he have some inflammatory opinions that maybe aren't correct? Hell yeah, but they're his opinions, he said a lot of other stuff that was entirely poignant, relevant, and accurate.
This yes/no true/false BS has got to stop. You don't get to hone in on somebody's one solitary opinion that might open up conversation to a "non-safe space", cry misogynist/racist/rapist, and then auto-dismiss the rest of their arguments like you've discovered some sort of irl Konami Konversation Kode.
That's terribad debating and awful human communication.
James Demore's firing really only proves that he was mostly right.
His stance against Code of Conduct, as evident by this Tweet: https://twitter.com/rvagg/status/887652116524707841 and follow up comments were considered inappropriate by some.
Even more details here: https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/310
The TSC members were not able to reach a natural consensus on the steps forward so a vote was called on two specific questions:
(A) Should Rod be removed from the TSC: Yes or No
(B) Should Rod be asked to voluntarily resign from the TSC: Yes or No
There are 13 members of the TSC. 10 members voted, two abstained, and Rod did not participate.
The vote came down 60% against removing Rod from the TSC and 60% against asking Rod to voluntarily resign.
If it's an open source software project, they are also free to fork the software and make their own project around it. While, obviously, two parallel projects divided by interpersonal issues isn't ideal and likely duplicates efforts, it's better than losing the work of either of the factions, so, given the existence of the social issues, it's quite possibly the best acheivable outcome.
I'm just wondering what would've happened if Rod was forced to resign and the other <50% voters who voted against it. Maybe a fork of NodeJS, but this time from Rod's fellows?
If you indeed have problems with the way nodejs is run, the first thing you do with a fork is present it upfront in your fork, with some idea on how you're going to go forward. All you see here is one issue potentially discussing some bad policies or people. wishy washy.
And discussion in another thread is almost satirical -- discussing "lifetime" of a benevolent dictator "for life". 
There's no clear leadership or goals for this fork.
"Additionally he discussed private information from the moderation repo in the public thread, which is explicitly against he moderation policy".
I don't like such secrecy. What's going on in there? Wasn't community so important, why can't we know?
So what if that guy doesn't like CoCs? It is fine for people to have other opinions. This is another case of people over reacting over small stuff like it happened with Brendan Eich or Douglas Crockford.
Oh gee, some people need to chill out.
used the same tactic against Crockford last year (Nodevember conf), also without any concrete evidence other than "he made me feel bad." If you go through regular tweets of the other heckers like Kat,
they're breaking their own CoC daily, but that's apparently fine because hating on white/men/straight/christian is considered PC.
Why do you give these sick people lee way is beyond me. They are bullies and they should be recognized as such.
100% agree. I've had to previously block both of these users you mentioned for harassment over Twitter.
It got to the point where one of them started taking out of context screenshots of my Twitter stream and attempting to rally other SJW twitter users to send harassing messages to me.
I did my own research weeks ago and found that Rod didn't do anything wrong. If anyone finds evidence to the contrary, please let me know.
If you're not 100% onboard with the politics, you're a horrible person.
Didn't they ever learn as kids sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me?
Surely, in OSS tons of people are going to have different opinions about many things, as long as they are respectful who cares what they think?
Seriously some people in this world need to eat a bag of concrete and harden the fuck up.
My point was based on sarcasm :) Reading all the noise on GH yesterday, those most vocal in having this guy kicked out are also screaming loudest about the "need to feel safe" - for me, this usually induces a gag reflex:
- "I am going to find where you live and do something nasty to you" <-- threat to safety
- "I am not sure about the value of a CoC" <-- not a threat to safety
In my personal view, all these fucking "name and shame" SJW's that sit on their high fucking horses judging people are a shameless pack of vicious fucking bullies, shrouded in virtue-signalling.
If somebody goes around in projects making threats or being grossly offensive in a general sense of the word, by all means address the situation. However, this situation - like countless others - is simply a concerted bullying effort.
I am not involved in node.js in any way, and stay very, very, fucking far away from any kind of open source participation after going through something similar with Sun and OpenOffice.org many years ago but this kind of bullshit makes me rage.
I agree with what you said above. Most people who bleat about safe spaces are the kind you need a safe space to get away from them.
There's another reason too; there's a theory going around that there's a sizable pool of potential competent contributors who are currently staying away from the Node.js project (and other projects) because they feel excluded (and this is commonly used as an argument as to why policies need to be changed). This fork is going to show whether that group of people really exists; if it does, then the fork will thrive, but if it does not, then it will die.
I don't think there's much to do about this now other than wait and see it play out. The results of this fork will become obvious soon enough, and it seems that this at least will get everybody off each other's backs for a while.
EDIT: Also, let's dial down the vitriol in this thread a little. There's no point in getting outraged over something that'll resolve itself.
Sit back and watch as you're bombarded with threats and comments about being pro-rape, a straight white male and the like
I'm also not a native english speaker and it feels like I'm walking on eggshells constantly.
I'd rather stick to a language/framework that aligns with my own preferences, than stick to one that tries to please to a large group of people.
I'm criticising design by committee.
The democracy exists through consumption by end users and layers in between... no internal conflicts, choice and democracy for the consumer, how is that a bad model.
Regardless of the reason, this seems like a premature announcement of the project. There isn't a roadmap, list of distinguishing features, or the guiding principles. More information is definitly needed here.
What makes this newsworthy? Is it a credible fork? What's the reason for the fork? Who is contributing?
> Current Project Team Members
> To be written
"We don't like the outcome, so we have to change the rules."
Please note that @ag_dubs that started the shit stirring after Rod's post sits on that board and was part of that decision.
Still we don't know what Rod did to her in the first place.
That won't be confusing in conversation.
That said, it is a bit unfortunate to fork or at least to try to fork a project like Node.js over these reasons. Although it is quite likely that the fork was mainly created to pressure the Node-devs to remove rvagg from the project after all.
What puzzles me: Even if we agree that rvagg violated the Code of Conduct, I am not sure that this should be enough to remove him from the TSC (Technical Steering Committee). Here are the alleged violations, so that you can decide for yourself: https://twitter.com/ohhoe/status/899748838302302212.
I was on the fence until I hit that part. The tacit admission that they're holding him responsible for what other people are saying on Twitter is all I need to know. They wanna feel like righteous warriors defeating evil.
What's with the secrecy? Not saying this is a non-issue, but the best way to present your issue as a non-issue is to be this vague about what you're complaining about.
Not that I am supporting it, just explaining why in their view this is bigger than just him.
I've never seen a technology deep sixed not by its technology, but by its politics and ideology.
If this is less "technical issues need to be resolved and we need to be agile" and more "I hate the other person so I won't work with him/her" though, then it would just cause problems all around the community.
> I'd be open to re-merging if and when the problems plaguing Node.js are resolved. Problematic people removed; use of "policy" as an excuse ended; power structures reorganized to emphasize community over tech. So far though it seems like there's little desire to fix these problems from those with the power to do so.
client: Why is there only clear text and flashing ads on my screen?
developer: Oh, yes - we implemented the new ayo libraries!
client: This looks like shit. Give me my site back!
developer: but, you don't understand! The new libraries are great, they emphasize community over tech!
client: [calls her P.A.] Richard, go find me a new tech team.
Then again, this doesn't seem anywhere near as crazy as the IO.js days.
Good luck to them though and anything that improves the node space is welcome in my book. Forks included.
> Almost a full day was devoted to agreeing to name the standard "Small Computer System Interface", which Boucher intended to be pronounced "sexy", but ENDL's Dal Allan pronounced the new acronym as "scuzzy" and that stuck.
I'll never pronounce GIF as JIF though.
Eric S. Raymond: Why Hackers Must Eject the SJWs (2015)
I imagine microcontroller software development stays free of them too, largely because of the barrier to entry.
I think we should keep it as it is and wait it out. They will find something else in a couple of years and move on.
The barrier to entry on maintaining a project like Node is large enough...my guess that nothing useful in terms of code or concepts will come from this fork.
Only screams and tantrums.
It's hard enough having the JS community taken seriously with the zeitgeist framework changing too quickly.