Node.js Forked Again Over Complaints of Unresponsive Leadership (thenewstack.io)

New submitter Kant shares a report: The codebase for popular Node.js JavaScript runtime has been forked again -- the second time in less than three years -- with a growing number of contributors charging that the Technical Steering Committee (TSC) leadership is ignoring repeated violations of the project's code of conduct. The new project, called Ayo will be managed under an open governance model. The complaints centered around ongoing behavior of NodeSource Director of Engineering, and Node.js TSC member Rod Vagg. The TSC received multiple complaints from Node.js members about a Tweet from Vagg promoting a Men's Rights Activist-slanted article, one that cast doubt on the validity of project Code-of-Conducts. In that Tweet, Vagg commented "If you've never considered the potential downsides of codes of conduct, here's a good place to start." [...] On August 21, The TSC voted on whether or not to remove Vagg from its ranks. Of the 10 TSC members who voted, 60 percent voted against removing Rod from the TSC and 60 percent voted against asking Rod to voluntarily resign. That the TSC voted to keep Vagg on the committee inflamed others in the project. One committee member, Myles Borins, resigned in protest. The decision to keep Vagg "undermines our Conduct Guidelines, drives away potential contributors, and in my opinion undermines the Committee's ability to govern," he wrote in a blog post. In a post further explaining the need for the forked Ayo project, developer Rudolf Olah explained that "Driving away contributors can be fatal in the open source world where most developers are essentially using their free time and volunteering to contribute. It is already difficult enough to attract contributors to smaller projects and larger projects, such as Node.js, need to be careful to make all contributors feel welcome."

Comments

Which contributor is driven away?

[Shotgun]

Would some possible contributors be driven away if they saw that Vagg was driven away by over zeaouls SJWs? I know I'd rather not deal with grandstanding jerks that would reject my code submission because they can't deal with my worldview not necessarily agreeing with theirs. I've got better things to do with my free time.

Re:Forked twice in three years?

[Shotgun]

NO.

This fork is going to signal virtue.

Why does it matter?

[farble1670]

On August 21, The TSC voted on whether or not to remove Vagg from its ranks. Of the 10 TSC members who voted, 60 percent voted against removing Rod from the TSC and 60 percent voted against asking Rod to voluntarily resign. That the TSC voted to keep Vagg on the committee inflamed others in the project.

I also don't understand why it matters that some member or another of a technical project does in their own time. The project should be about the code, not someone's opinion on men's rights or whatever. It'd be different if the person used the project to forward their personal beliefs ("Node.js supports mens' rights!") but I didn't get from TFA that was the case.

Re:Why does it matter?

[Anonymous Coward]

And you know that is all fact?

That he thinks women should be barefoot and pregnant?

Where did he say that?

Oh wait you're putting words into his mouth and taking others out of context so you can continue with your witch hunt? OK carry on.

Now I see...

[Shotgun]

A quick scan of the (long) article that Vagg commented on reveals why the SJWs are so upset. The article is a direct attack on their worldview. The TL;DR version of the article is that people think differently, and the speech codes that have come into vogue at universities therefore discriminate against specific minorities. WTF is a self-flagellating SJW to do when the fight to uphold the victimization of ever smaller sets of imagined minorities ends up victimizing a minority? The cognitive dissonance must be so debilitating that they can't get away from it even in their safe space echo chambers.

This is bizarre

[XXongo]

actually when allegations of harassment come up in a traditional project, that person is either fired or sent for some stupid HR training...

Except, as far as I can tell from the article, there weren't any "allegations of harassment": he didn't harass anybody. He tweeted a link to an article-- this article. He did not harass anybody.

The article isn't even one about "Men's rights advocacy" ("MRA")-- what he tweeted was a link to an article presenting the case that codes of conduct which suppress free speech discriminate against people with Asperger's syndrome, because these people have problems understanding what other people might thing would be offensive (the article was about "neurodiverse" people in general, but primarily focussed on Aspergers (which the article calls "Aspies").)

I somewhat wonder about the level of meta here. A person is accused of violating speech guidelines by tweeting a link to an article about speech guidelines?

Re:This is bizarre

[Anonymous Coward]

But they get concentrated in these kinds of projects. 1% of the population are visual thinkers, visual thinkers make up 40% of geniuses, most visual thinkers seemingly have learning disabilities, of which many fall into the Aspergers spectrum. Visual Thinkers are typically absurdly good at abstract reasoning, making them very likely to get STEM degrees, especially with computers where you don't need to deal with people as often. Mix in that tech culture loves a meritocracy, and you have a recipe for a PC (pun) nightmare with a high percentage of "Aspies" in leadership positions.

Do you want competent "jerk" aspies or incompetent nice people? There is a high degree of separation in typical ability.

Re:This is bizarre

[epyT-R]

And in the big tech companies like Facebook, the "office" is really just a big giant open room with open tables.

This explains much about the quality of code coming from that company.

Tech work isn't for people who don't like to deal with people, it's for people-people now. You need to love being surrounded by your coworkers at all times, with no privacy at all, and constant chatter. Any time discussions about this come up online, you'll see two camps: old people (Gen-X or older) who hate the new workspaces, and young people who absolutely love them.

While it is true this is being foisted on the workforce out of misguided ideology (and cost savings), it's still too early to see what the actual effects will be. Somehow, I doubt there's 'that' much of a difference in preferences. Reflective thought generally requires quiet time with some isolation. Give the open room to the sales team and give the office space to the people building the product.

Re:This is bizarre

[lucm]

The guy tweeted a link and made a mild supportive comment about the article. Even if it had been a link to the Necronomicon or the Satanic Bible, there's just no way anyone should get their panties in a bunch over this, even less fork a project.

What's really happening here is called a witch hunt, and the angry mob was looking for any reason to throw someone in the fire pit and put themselves in charge because the existing leadership was not joining their collective hysteria.

Fuck those people. This kind of hive mind of limpdickness and bendoverness is a slow collective suicide and anyone who has drank so much virtue signaling kool-aid that they can't see it deserve the nightmarish world they're progressively creating.

Re:This is insane

[Anonymous Coward]

It's always been this way, in the US at least. You can be fired because your boss doesn't like your shoelaces and it's completely legal. Places like California, which have more restrictions than most states on what employers can and can't do in regards to how they treat employees, is often labeled as being "unfriendly" to business. If a politician tries to introduce a bill that will put further restrictions on the reasons employers can fire people, such as participating in a political event outside of working hours, they get branded as a "job killer" or "anti-business".

I will say, in California at least, it is illegal to take any kind of job action because a person participated in a political event outside of working hours and off company property. The key sections of the Cal Labor Code are 1101 and 1102. I swear there's at least one more, but I can't find it now. Those labor codes also cast a bit of a shadow over those emails you'll tend to get from company leadership encouraging you to write to a representative about some specific bit of legislation that would benefit the company. The biggest problem is that those codes are likely enforced by an agency most people don't even know exists called the Department of Industrial Relations, which is part of the Labor Commissioner's office, not the Department of Fair Employment and Housing ("DFEH") which is where most people would likely go.

To hear plenty of people talk about it, California is one of the hardest states to do business in. So where do we, as a society, want to draw the line? Personally, I'd like to see the US adopt a universal "for cause" employment system. You can only fire someone for a legitimate business reason, such as not meeting performance expectations, or the company needs to lay off a number of people or become insolent. None of this BS where your boss can just be in a bad mood and fire you because you're the first person they saw and you have no legal recourse. I'd also like to see agencies like the DFEH and EEOC be changed from neutral to pro-employee. Very few people can afford to hire an attorney after being fired, especially since they just lost their source of income and need to reprioritize spending. Everything would still have to go before an administrative law judge where the employer would have a chance to present their side, but there should be agencies that advocate for employees instead of being neutral investigators. That's just my opinion anyway.

Re: Open Sores

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out the contributions of the moron leading the push to remove him.

It's a fucking joke. He's contributed almost nothing... The tiny scraps of code are fucking awful. He has hundreds of commits to edit documentation for "diversity" and "inclusion", and thousands of posts arguing with actual contributors about his bullshit.

What a toxic piece of trash...