Transphobic maintainer should be removed from project
CoralineAda opened this issue · comments
Elia Schito is publicly calling trans people out for "not accepting reality" on Twitter. His Twitter profile mentions that he is a core contributor to opal. Is this what the other maintainers want to be reflected in the project? Will any transgender developers feel comfortable contributing?
https://twitter.com/krainboltgreene/status/611569515315507200
If you want him removed, start working on Opal and contributing as much as him to everything he did for Opal so we have a replacement that's more in orientation with your morals and views.
Protip: you won't because you can't.
Also to elaborate more on that, Opal is a technology, technology is moral-less, if a transgender contributor appeared @elia's views wouldn't even appear in here, because why would anyone care, bring contributions, they will be accepted with open arms, bring morals and politics in here, and you will be shown the metaphorical door.
@elia is free to have his opinions, in the case he'll bring his views against anyone contributing based on any of their mental or physical attributes, then it would be reason to tell him not to do that.
As you @strand, are free to not contribute to Opal, feel free to use any other Ruby to JavaScript technology.
The opal team, though, is not a technology. Contributing to a software project also means contributing to the works of others, requiring mutual respect.
Requesting contributions before being heard is a pretty low stab as well - you are basically saying that opinions gain worth with merit.
The personal views of a maintainer, as long as they are not influencing in a discriminatory way the contributions accepted in a project, should be off-limits for discussion IMHO. It pains me to see this even be an issue here. Thanks @meh for stating what should be obvious.
Damn. I found out about this project thanks to this issue, and it's super relevant to my interests. But not going to come near it with a thousand foot pole if these are the people I'd have to interact with.
To @meh and others who think that OSS is a moral-free zone: https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/the-dehumanizing-myth-of-the-meritocracy
Pro tip: you won't read it because you don't care.
The opal team, though, is not a technology. Contributing to a software project also means contributing to the works of others, requiring mutual respect.
Bingo. If developers can't trust the Opal team to treat them with respect, why would they want to use and contribute to Opal?
Is the Opal team really willing to value a single contributor now over hundreds of users and contributers in the future? Seems pretty short-sighted to me.
@skade @elia is not telling anyone to not contribute to Opal because of their mental or physical attributes, and there isn't any unwelcoming to anyone contributing, he's free to say anything he wants, like you are, as long as it doesn't get in the way of the project.
And requesting someone to be removed because of their views without even knowing what their work is, is as much of a low stab.
Protip: you won't because you can't.
Being this dismissive of someone is not really a great way to run an OSS project. You will lose out as people feel less welcome.
Also Coraline has been in the industry for many years, and is one of the most seasoned developers I know. This was not a fair stab.
@aredridel as long as you interact with the people about the technology, you will be welcome and treated with respect.
When you bring something completely unrelated, then you aren't, as simple as that. It's like I started talking about candy in here, it is not the place.
“The personal views of a maintainer, as long as they are not influencing in a discriminatory way the contributions accepted in a project” – the personal views of the maintainer influence even the contributions submitted to a project (including both patches and involvement in the community). They won’t be accepted because you never even get to see them.
“not telling anyone to not contribute to Opal” – no, but he’s dissuading them from participating just by espousing these biases.
Exactly: as long as I interact solely about the technology, and who I am is never mentioned, I'm welcome to participate and be respected. This is second class participation, and this is not respect.
@CoralineAda I won't read it because it is not relevant to the project.
If you want to tell people to not come near Opal because one of the people working on it doesn't like what you like, then feel free to, nobody is forcing anyone to use or not use Opal.
@aredridel you don't mention who you are because it doesn't matter, at all.
Why would you bring it up when asking questions or discussing something related to Opal? It's completely irrelevant.
You want an active contributer removed from the project because of his political views? Seriously? And you're calling him discriminatory? Sigh.
I really can't imagine myself not wanting to contribute to an OSS project until I have vetted the personal views on a variety of issues of every single maintainer. This is madness, and frankly it's very hard for me to believe that's actually what some of you are saying...
It's not the views: it's how he interacts with others. Views held close are hard to care about. Views taken out in public, about people in that public? That requires care and consideration.
@fivetanley because wanting a core contributor out because he doesn't like candy and you do is not dismissive?
I don't care how long @CoralineAda has been in the industry, this is irrelevant to the project.
@aredridel if he doesn't interact that way with people when talking about project related things, then it's not an issue for Opal.
Likening transphobia to a penchant for candy is offensive and belies a deeper ignorance. I guess this extends beyond @elia.
@CoralineAda in this particular situation, it is the exact same thing, you don't know anything about my views or who and what I am, and you never will, because it's irrelevant to technology.
@meh This is not about "what [someone] likes". It's about who a person is. That you think this is the same thing is why there's a problem, and why people are saying they don't feel safe in your community.
@meh many of your views are easy to discern from your comments here.
All I'm saying: the reaction to this thread is a reason why I'd go from 'Oh, this software is cool' to "nope, not in a million years". It's that I've got the energy to spare that I'm willing to speak up and say something.
because wanting a core contributor out because he doesn't like candy and you do is not dismissive?
No, I'm saying you not even browsing Coraline's github to measure "merit" is dismissive; her work and expertise in ruby obviously speaks for itself.
Also comparing people to candy is really dehumanizing and makes me really sad. As someone who often works on JS transforms I had been interested in opal for a while, but now I won't contribute. The way you treat Coraline by not at least listening and asking questions, and also the way you are talking to me, tells me everything about the way you run the project.
Farewell. I'm sure others will be able to expound their views more clearly.
@sipple who and what a person is, is irrelevant to the project, as long as those things aren't brought up in the project itself, and they shouldn't be, because there's no need to.
@aredridel you're welcome to use any other Ruby to JavaScript technologies, nobody is forcing you to use Opal or contribute to it.
If it works for you, use it, if it doesn't, don't.
@aredridel also I assure you, trying to deduce my views on these comments will lead you nowhere true.
@fivetanley because I'm sure @CoralineAda checked all @elia has done for Opal before coming here and wanting him out because they don't agree on things that have nothing to do with Opal itself.
If you want to see how the project is ran, check issues and discussions that were actually relevant to the project.
But as @CoralineAda said, you won't because you don't care.
No, I won't because of how THIS issue is being treated.
@aredridel and you're free to think and do what you think is best, godspeed.
@meh You've said that you're committed to creating a welcoming environment for new contributors. Saying that is easy. Doing that is hard. You're failing at it: right now, as a queer woman, I do not believe Opal would treat any contributions I might make fairly. I do not believe that I would be welcomed onto the project.
@bhaibel why do you even have to say who and what you are? It's irrelevant to any contribution, or question, or request for help, or discussion.
Want to talk about the technology? You're welcome to and you will be treated with respect.
Want to talk about what you're going to do on the weekend? This is not the place.
because wanting a core contributor out because he doesn't like candy and you do is not dismissive?
@meh jesus christ. this isn't about "not liking candy", you fucking muppet, it's about making public statements against a class of people based on a core part of who they are. this is not. the same. fucking. thing.
if someone has openly expressed hostility toward me or people like me in one context, of course I'm not going to be fucking comfortable interacting with them in another context.
@erisdev Stay civil. People are reading this.
You cannot separate people from the technology they create or the technology they use. Ever. It's not possible. I cannot work with people if they bring to the table with them the idea that I, as a human, am wrong about who I fundamentally am at my core. This isn't about someone's "political" views - it's about him not seeing some people as even being human
this is not respect right now, so it's obvious that we will not be treated with respect.
@erisdev in this context, it is the same thing, why? Because it's as irrelevant.
If we were talking about these issues onto themselves, I agree with you.
@meh it is absolutely not. read the edit to my other comment.
@jdax you can, if they don't bring those views when working together on the project. And why would they? It's irrelevant to the project.
Sometimes people don't like eachother, that's normal, you can't demand to like everyone you work with, that doesn't mean you can't work with them and then both of you go out with your own friends.
This issue is a case study in how the open source community systematically protects abusers and excludes LGBT developers. A white cisgender man can publicly claim that transgender people are delusional and suffer zero consequences in the open source community.
What do you think an LGBT developer thinks when they see this? Do they see a safe, welcoming environment where their identities and well-being will be respected and protected? Or a callous, self-serving machine that ruthlessly prioritises short-term technical goals over all else?
You can't divorce your choices from their sociopolitical context just because it's convenient for getting a bunch of code shipped. If you're choosing to collaborate with somebody despite knowing about their prejudice against the LGBT community, then that's a choice you're consciously making. It's a choice that reveals a personal belief system which prioritises code over people.
Maybe you're fine with that, but a growing number of us in the wider community of developers are not. I'm not attempting to change your mind. I just want to add my voice to those stating "this is not okay by me either". As much as I hate to spam your project's issue with a non-technical comment, I hate the idea of being complicit in my silence even more.
@erisdev being unable to work with people you don't like when the interactions are strictly professional, is entirely your problem.
@aredridel because wanting a core contributor thrown out because of who they are is respectful?
So very well said, @hnrysmth
@hnrysmth 👍
@meh calling me delusional isn't exactly professional, buddy ol' pal.
I see a bunch of LGBT people talking about everything else besides code in this issue. I wasn't aware issue trackers were for people.
@meh I'd rather censure, really. But you're confusing who someone is with their actions.
OSS projects are, at their core, about people. People who choose to come together to donate their time and attention to collaborate on a shared problem. Good technology is a side-effect of good people, well cared for. If you think you can produce technology without caring about people, you either misunderstand tech, or you are happy to limit your pool of contributors to people with a lot of privilege and a thick skin, i.e. the usual suspects: aggressive young white men.
We'll get to talking code if this is shown to be a place that's respectful. Turns out ... people shit on us all the time.
@andrewmcwatters I see a dude posting passive aggressive complaints about the topic and not adding anything to the conversation.
@meh I literally did not say you said it. it was the other guy, the guy this whole issue was about in the first place.
And what happens when I start commiting and someone who doesn't view LGBT people as human starts making commit messages that might look like funny in-jokes but use slurs? Or uses those slurs in issue trackers? Or the IRC channel? It's not my problem if I can't work with someone who doesn't think I'm even a human being. It's the problem of the person who thinks some people are more worthy of respect than others.
@hnrysmth +1
@meh if your key contributor spends his free time burning crosses in black people's back yards, would you consider that "political views"? "Leave him alone, he doesn't openly discriminate against black people in his code" feels pretty hollow.
Obviously not the same thing, but I draw the parallel because these aren't "I think the tax policy is stupid" type politics. The sort of views you're writing off as "politics" are views that actively discriminate against entire groups of people. Those people, oddly enough, don't want to work with or interact with said developer, and by extension, your project.
@andrewmcwatters That, right there, is a political statement.
@andrewmcwatters when I think about OSS, I think of community management, emotional labour, and risks to my mental health. That you don't is a product of your privilege.
This issue is a case study in how the open source community systematically protects abusers and excludes LGBT developers.
Nobody is being excluded in any way.
A white cisgender man can publicly claim that transgender people are delusional and suffer zero consequences in the open source community.
He can, because he has freedom of speech, he didn't write it anywhere in the project.
He's free to say that, and you're free to say that's not acceptable, that doesn't have anything to do with Opal.
What do you think an LGBT developer thinks when they see this? Do they see a safe, welcoming environment where their identities and well-being will be respected and protected? Or a callous, self-serving machine that ruthlessly prioritises short-term technical goals over all else?
What they see is their problem, if they cannot or do not want to work on a project when nobody is being excluded or ignored because of it, then, again, it's their problem.
If @elia had done that in an issue, on gitter, on the mailing list, on IRC, on StackOverflow, then I agree, that IS a problem and it should be fixed.
But that's not the case, he said that on HIS Twitter, stating HIS opinion, like you're stating YOURS.
You can't divorce your choices from their sociopolitical context just because it's convenient for getting a bunch of code shipped. If you're choosing to collaborate with somebody despite knowing about their prejudice against the LGBT community, then that's a choice you're consciously making. It's a choice that reveals a personal belief system which prioritises code over people.
Yes, it's a choice, you're free to not work with those people, it's YOUR choice.
Maybe you're fine with that, but a growing number of us in the wider community of developers are not. I'm not attempting to change your mind. I just want to add my voice to those stating "this is not okay by me either". As much as I hate to spam your project's issue with a non-technical comment, I hate the idea of being complicit in my silence even more.
It's not a problem of a project that someone has differing ideas, everyone has their own and they should learn to work together.
And how do they do that? Not by agreeing, but by knowing what is relevant and what is not.
@nslater nailed it.
Pretty sure that people write code, people review code and people release code. If said people are discriminatory towards contributors, there's absolutely no reason for the project to even bother being open if they can't shed bigoted views of the world to accept what would be a potential new long-time contributor to a project.
As others as mentioned, I'll personally blacklist all of the maintainer's projects.
SIDE-NOTE: Freedom of speech != hate speech. Just because you can say it doesn't mean it has to be tolerated.
btw folks get sacked all the fucking time from public-facing jobs (which being an OSS developer absolutely is! you interact with your users whenever they file bug reports or contribute to your project) for expressing hateful views like this.
Nobody is being excluded in any way.
This thread and how it is being handled pretty much means it'll be my only interaction with this project. That's exclusion, in practice if not rules.
OSS projects are, at their core, about people.
No, they're MADE by people, OSS projects are, at their core, projects.
People who choose to come together to donate their time and attention to collaborate on a shared problem.
Because they need it, they have no reason to show any prejudice when working together, why? Because it's irrelevant.
Good technology is a side-effect of good people, well organised. If you think you can produce technology without caring about people, you either misunderstand tech, or you are happy to limit your contributors to people with a lot of privilege and a thick skin, i.e. the usual suspects: aggressive young white men.
People do what they can do, and do not what they cannot, that's obvious.
@aredridel yep. classic "I don't see a problem so you must be making it up".
It's really quite telltale how every single post here discarding this as a non-issue so far was from white, presumably straight and cis dudes. Of course it's a non-issue for you. For others, not so much.
It's not a problem of a project that someone has differing ideas, everyone has their own and they should learn to work together.
There are things you can work together over, like "I think we should use tabs" and things you can't like "I'm going to defend slurs in commit messages, or state that this project is apolitical in a way that entrenches the existing contributors and their views"
@erisdev ah okay, my bad, now I understand what you meant, yes, it would have been unprofessional if he said that while working on the project, but he did not.
Thank you for not trying to argue around the central theme of my comment, which is that you're a lousy person if you'll work with somebody like that just to get your damn code shipped.
@meh hypothetical/hyperbolic question: would you work with a child molester if he produced good code?
And what happens when I start commiting and someone who doesn't view LGBT people as human starts making commit messages that might look like funny in-jokes but use slurs? Or uses those slurs in issue trackers? Or the IRC channel? It's not my problem if I can't work with someone who doesn't think I'm even a human being. It's the problem of the person who thinks some people are more worthy of respect than others.
Yes, if that is what happens, I agree, that's a problem and it must be fixed, as I already said.
But that's not what happened.
We'll get to talking code if this is shown to be a place that's respectful. Turns out ... people shit on us all the time.
How can it be shown as such if the situation doesn't arise?
@nslater 👍 👍 👍
Btw, half of this discussion wouldn't happen without the very harsh and personal answer @meh wrote when closing the issue. That answer expresses exactly what are his opinions about (the lack of) tech diversity. If this doesn't prove how individuals opinions are pervasive in OSS culture (not only tech), I don't know what does.
Pretty sure that people write code, people review code and people release code. If said people are discriminatory towards contributors, there's absolutely no reason for the project to even bother being open if they can't shed bigoted views of the world to accept what would be a potential new long-time contributor to a project.
I agree with that, if such a situation arose, it would be a problem, but it hasn't arisen.
As others as mentioned, I'll personally blacklist all of the maintainer's projects.
And you are free to do that.
SIDE-NOTE: Freedom of speech != hate speech. Just because you can say it doesn't mean it has to be tolerated.
I disagree, it's either total freedom of speech, or it's not freedom. Partial freedom is not freedom.
btw folks get sacked all the fucking time from public-facing jobs (which being an OSS developer absolutely is! you interact with your users whenever they file bug reports or contribute to your project) for expressing hateful views like this.
And the company employing them has the right to do so.
Freedom of speech != freedom from consequences. And if you say "trans people aren't human" you're gonna face some consequences. And right now you're consequences are people do not feel safe contributing to this project or using it!
Sounds like their problem when no one is stopping them.
@meh if your key contributor spends his free time burning crosses in black people's back yards, would you consider that "political views"? "Leave him alone, he doesn't openly discriminate against black people in his code" feels pretty hollow.
Yes, what he does in his free time is completely irrelevant.
Obviously not the same thing, but I draw the parallel because these aren't "I think the tax policy is stupid" type politics. The sort of views you're writing off as "politics" are views that actively discriminate against entire groups of people. Those people, oddly enough, don't want to work with or interact with said developer, and by extension, your project.
And they are free to do so. Want to use the technology? Use it. Do not want to? Don't.
@meh hypothetical/hyperbolic question: would you work with a child molester if he produced good code?
Yes.
@meh 👍 Well said. Keep these things separate.
Yes, what he does in his free time is completely irrelevant.
And yet it leads right back to here. "who is this guy?" "an opal developer. Says in his profile." He is representing this project.
Thank you for not trying to argue around the central theme of my comment, which is that you're a lousy person if you'll work with somebody like that just to get your damn code shipped.
And you're free to hold that opinion.
Freedom of speech != freedom from consequences. And if you say "trans people aren't human" you're gonna face some consequences. And right now you're consequences are people do not feel safe contributing to this project or using it!
If they cannot separate things, it's entirely their problem. They're free to disagree with @elia as @elia is free to disagree with them, that doesn't mean it will affect the interactions related to Opal.
Btw, half of this discussion wouldn't happen without the very harsh and personal answer @meh wrote when closing the issue. That answer express exactly what are his opinions about (the lack of) tech diversity. If this doesn't prove how individuals opinions are pervasive in OSS culture (not only tech), I don't know what does.
The issue was on the issue tracker of Opal, and the issue wasn't related to Opal, it was related to differing opinions of @CoralineAda and @elia, on words said outside of Opal.
And yet it leads right back to here. "who is this guy?" "an opal developer. Says in his profile." He is representing this project.
He is not representing anyone but himself. If you let what and who is affect your decision on using something he works on, it would be the same as he having his decisions affected on what and who anyone else is, which is the core of the issue at hand.
@jedstraw 👍 There's more than one side to this story. If you want to encourage a friendly development ecosystem, you need to start with yourself.
@jedstraw @andrewmcwatters good, I don't want you using my software. do you think this is some kind of joke?
It's really quite telltale how every single post here discarding this as a non-issue so far was from white, presumably straight and cis dudes. Of course it's a non-issue for you. For others, not so much.
As I said, you don't know, and never will know, who and what I am, because it's irrelevant.
@erisdev No, we don't. But you just publicly discriminated against us for our religious beliefs. Do you see the disconnect here?
@meh Exactly.
@erisdev Not joking at all. The fact that you think I'm joking is just a sign that you have zero empathy for people that share my belief.
@jedstraw is a newly registered account to sockpuppet this issue.
The issue was on the issue tracker of Opal, and the issue wasn't related to Opal, it was related to differing opinions of @CoralineAda and @elia, on words said outside of Opal.
What basis did you have to say @CoralineAda couldn't contribute if she wanted to, other than your own prejudice against people advocating social justice? That contradicts the core of your argument. Opinions do matter in an OSS project. Unless you're ok with only receiving contribution from straight white dudes. Or not even that, speaking for myself.
@aredridel Yes, it's a newly registered account. I'm not stupid. I don't want to be blackballed in the industry for having conservative religious beliefs.
@jedstraw @andrewmcwatters cool gaslight brah.
@erisdev ?
@erisdev I don't get that reference
As I said, you don't know, and never will know, who and what I am, because it's irrelevant.
From this thread, it sounds like you're a robot incapable of human emotions and empathy. Which is just terrible for leading popular open source projects (> 2500 stars!).