Slashdot Mirror
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."
Now would be the time for that "open sores" troll to post something. Alas, all we have left is that "APPS!!!" guy.
>> forked again -- the second time in less than three years -- with...contributors charging that...leadership is ignoring repeated violations of the project's code of conduct
Enterprise-ready and eating the world. Got it.
No wonder Node.js is so popular these days...
With a name like Rod Vagg he should just get into porn and be done with it.
Should be non-reactionary leadership, forking it for social justice is ridiculous.
Back in the day, software projects used to be killed because of technical limitations. Now they are killed because someone objects to what someone else does in their spare time.
According to the github page it has been forked 7,663 times. This seems to be much ado about nothing.
A real chance to see whether SJWs can actually code now that they have their own fork.
Posted anonymously to preempt needless forks of my own projects.
Buying a political orientation together with your programming language has never been a good idea. If you don't buy into a tax policy when you're buying your breakfast cereals, why would you do that when shopping for your programming tools?
Ezekiel 23:20
Here's the actual code of conduct:
https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
I can see some problems with this CoC. For example, "trolling" is in the same league of "unacceptable behavior" as "derogatory attacks". One could also state that someone was "in violation of the CoC" by not "using welcoming and inclusive language"...enough.
Maybe someone with more HR/legal background can pipe up, but perhaps what should be done is to break out the "you're being a jackwagon" behaviors from the "you're gonna get fired" behaviors, and then evaluate potential offenders against that. (Plenty of real world organizations thrive by successfully managing jackwagons, but very few are willing to carry a legal timebomb.)
So they are forking the project because some feminist's feelz were hurt over a tweet? Holy shit...there is never a shortage of retards around.
I thought, according to Javascript is Eating the World:
JavaScript and NodeJS are single handedly eating the world of software.
Looks more like Node.js is being eaten by its own.
[ Also, I would like to point out to the editors that two things cannot "single handedly" do anything. Just sayin'. ]
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
So it's a violation of the code of conduct to suggest a code of conduct may not be necessary? From the article I'm not seeing much about mens rights and more to do with 'neurodiversity' - though I'm aware that the support of "men's rights" is like many things, associated with nazis by the left right now (i.e. anything the populist left does not advocate). But assuming he was linking an article about men's rights, does advocating men's rights violate the Node.JS code of conduct?
I glanced at the code of conduct and saw nothing against criticizing the code of conduct, nor against the supposed support of men's rights. What I did find were guidelines saying members should "Be respectful of differing viewpoints and experiences", and "Gracefully accept constructive criticism". So are the people railing against the TSC instead violating the code of conduct?
The code of conduct can be found here: https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
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.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
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.
All this forking is really annoying!
I'm half tempted to create a fork for people who want to work on a fork that doesn't fork...
Demanding that every contributor to a project pass the litmus test du jour is childish... eventually, every one of us will fail.
If nothing else, it's a mark of immaturity to be unable to work with somebody who has a viewpoint you disagree with.
You change somebody's opinion by showing them you're a friendly human being, not by being an enemy they dismiss outright.
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
As history taught us, even the tiniest difference should immediately provoke divisions; coming up with catchy names for each faction is also quite important (excellent work!). But this situation is harder than usual because, as everyone knows, fully agreeing with the code of conduct is a basic requirement before starting to use any programming language.
In fact and despite not using Node.js at all, I cannot ignore what is likely to become one of the most relevant episodes of our generation. During the next months, I will be living in a cave and hunting my food with my bare hands, just to get closer to mother nature such that I can reach the peace of mind required to even start thinking about what will be my position regarding a so extremely relevant issue.
Just in case: LOL.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
Most package managers don't automatically download dependencies for a reason, yet node.js developers ignored that. They got every plugin developer to rely on auto-download. Then they go and break it, causing a buttload of pain for developers. So yeah, lets re-invent a wheel with a triangle and then fuck every developer with it.
The article linked to raises questions about speech codes of conduct, especially at universities, and points out that some people may have neurological diseases like Tourette's Syndrome that don't make them dangerous but may make them unable to comply with such codes. How exactly this is a "Men's Rights Activist" article is beyond me, although I guess men and men in IT may have more tendencies towards these issues. So some SJW got butt hurt because a writer dared to suggest compassion for people with different neurological wiring and this led to the vote and fork. Know what I find most disturbing? That 40% of the people agreed with the SJWs. If this is all it took to make them lose their minds, it's truly a sad day.
Here's what my Code of Conduct would be ...if I had a Code of Conduct:
If you're not here to make meaningful contributions of good code to this project regardless of your, or anyone else's, viewpoints, then Fuck You, Get. Out.
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.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Just prove how immature are Node.js project contributors.
Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
All this commotion because Vagg ignored the CoC.
This is a good example. They fracture communities, exclude everybody whose world-view they do not like, suppress opinions, perform inquisitions into private, non-criminal activities and generally place PC far above performance and technological skill. It is a reasonable assumption that node.js at the very least got much weaker due to a non-technical issue. These are exactly the people that made the dark ages dark. And they seem to want that state back.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Ayo? LMAO!
I know all the good names are taken, but srsly
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Back in the day, software projects used to be killed because of technical limitations. Now they are killed because someone objects to what someone else does in their spare time.
So let me get this straight.
Rod Vagg tweeted using his personal twitter account, on his own time, and referred to an article which appears to be quite worthy of discussion. The title The Neurodiversity Case for Free Speech pretty-much describes what one finds in the article. It's about "speech codes", and the effects of limiting what people can say.
The article is completely and totally academic, with a position and supporting argument, written by a psychology professor!
And for tweeting a link to this article, he loses his position as Director of Engineering?
You can get doxxed, threatened, and fired for having a political opinion on your own time if you get caught. Even if you don't publicly voice your opinion on the net, you can get fired for being caught on a security camera at a protest.
This political climate - the one we are living in right now - is insane.
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?
How is SJLinux doing?
Keep at it, little buckeroo, you'll get there someday!
Auckland Youth Orchestra?
A song by "chris brown" and "tyga"?
A singer-songwriter?
Some wearable app controlled something-a-rather snake oil?
Sorry Ayo, not even PageRank thinks you're relevant
Didn't get any mention of "ayo js" until page 3. Usually I support "Page 3", but not this kind.
Sounds like they need a good SJW purge. Go and start your little fork and let's see who comes up with the better product.
I doubt this will do anything, since it's a fork and the forkers would need to convince everyone to switch. It is an interesting symbolic gesture though.
I know my opinion is very different from most Slashdotters on this subject, but I actually see some of the points these "SJWs" are trying to make. Everyone has the right to free speech, but leading a public open source project means that people will put a little more scrutiny on you than the average person. Publically supporting a position like MRA in a politically charged environment doesn't look good in most people's eyes. The stereotype in the world of development/IT is that we're all a bunch of bro-culture jerks, Asperger's sufferers and socially maladjusted men who don't want women in our little club. Even if that isn't true, why do anything to feed into this perception? Even if you're on your third wife, paying 60% of your income in alimony and child support, or have a female boss you feel is holding you back, why publically endorse a lightning-rod subject like MRA? Rant in private with your other MRA buddies, not out in the open.
Not everyone can pull off being Linus Torvalds, for example. His insult-laden rants are legendary, but usually he's correct even if he can't be nice about it, and people give him a pass because of it. I've worked with a lot of very smart people who, for whatever reason, have had serious personality flaws that were ignored as long as they kept them somewhat under control. The thing that's different now is social media. Even the President tweets whatever comes to his mind at 3 in the morning and has zero filtering capabilities. Ever since LinkedIn changed their interface to clone Facebook, I've seen people get into comment-fights and post very controversial articles/topics...on a site that's basically stapled onto the back of your resume and designed to be your professional "brand." People in positions of leadership need to understand that their words and actions carry a little more weight than the average person.
A group of jagoffs decided to fork NodeJS over bullshit political reasons.
So Vagg tweeted something that not everyone agrees with? Who cares? Apparently enough people bitched so the TSC had a vote whether or not he should stay on the committee. 4 of the 10 people who voted thought that Vagg did a thought crime and should be virtually flogged and removed. Fortunately, the majority disagreed with modern day McCarthyism. As an added bonus, a petulant member by the name of Borins resigned when he didn't get his way.
Except those who fail the political purity test.
When you have two sets of contributors who refuse to work with one another, you cannot keep both sets. You can only choose between them.
Which you have. You don't get to pretend you're welcoming everyone after that.
When the political purity test is more important than the code, the project died a long time ago.
The article they posted is literally the most ironic reason to rage quit and fork. The article talks about how strict codes of conduct hinder creative outlets and can damage a society by firing people like Isaac Newton for who they are.
Just me
I second that.
Wow, Node.js just scored. They got rid of all the whiny SJWs on their project in one fell swoop. Now they can get real work done. Enjoy your fork guys!
Looking for a computer support specialist for your small business? Check out
Right... Because you've never argued with some asshole on the Internet.
I guess you could say you weren't arguing with them in an attempt to change their views, but that'd seem a bit sillier than doing so. I'm pretty sure nobody argued without hope of changing views, pretty much never.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
1st rule: You do not talk about Code of Conduct. ...
2nd rule: You DO NOT talk about Code of Conduct!
3rd rule: White CIS males must check their privileges.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Right... Because you've never argued with some asshole on the Internet.
I think you've misunderstood my posts, and replies. I have certainly argued with people on the internet.
I guess you could say you weren't arguing with them in an attempt to change their views, but that'd seem a bit sillier than doing so. I'm pretty sure nobody argued without hope of changing views, pretty much never.
Experience and science shows that if you present people with facts contradicting their feelings, they usually double down. Once someone's twisted themselves in knots they will never untwist themselves, but it's entertaining to watch them jump through ever more elaborate hoops kind of like a text-mode performing seal.
Plus the rampant misogynists that I argue with I never expect to convert. For the benefit of third party readers, I don't feel that highly modded egregious bullshit should be left unchallenged.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
need to be careful to make all contributors feel welcome.
Except the people that we hate. We can make them resign or destroy their project all we want because they deserve the hate. Which group is the hate group again? I'm getting confused.
-- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
It's ironic that "If you've never considered the potential downsides of codes of conduct, here's a good place to start." brought about the downsides of codes of conduct.
Protect your browser with the Force Safe Search add-on
It's your story, you can tell it any way you want to. ;-)
(I fully admit that I've gotten emotional and tried to reason with idiots in an attempt to change their thinking. It's seldom successful.)
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
So a dude dares to have an opinion and people lose their shit over it.
Long story short, it's another io.js and everyone will carry on as per normal. If anything relevant is contributed to the fork, it will eventually be merged. Whatevs.
Wow. Just wow. I think we found our village idiot.