Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

[Behdad Esfahbod <behdad behdad org>]

I'm trying to stay out of the discussion at least today.  But:

On 11/25/2009 12:49 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lionel Dricot wrote:
> > Do you think that many people were turned out of the GNOME community
> > because of an hostile experience? I don't think so.  (I might be wrong, I
> > just never met anybody that has a bad experience).
>
> Some names of good contributors who have drifted away from GNOME, at
> least partly because of the tone of discourse:

This is entirely misleading.  "at least partly" doesn't mean anything.  Is 
this the ten people you said you can name off the top of your head?   Other 
than Telsa and partially Ross, have any other ones expressed to you or 
publicly that they left GNOME "at least partly because of the tone of 
discourse"?  And when did Jorge drifted away from GNOME?  Last I checked he 
was around just fine.  And Google blackhole had no part?


> Dave Camp
> Seth Nickell
> Alex Graveley
> Telsa Gwynne
> Jacob Berkmann
> Ross Golder
> Daniel Veillard
> Joe Shaw
> Jorge Castro
>
> Another bunch of people who are still around the free software world,
> but who no longer consider themselves GNOME community members - I can't
> speak to their motivations, of course:
>
> Nat Friedman
> Miguel de Icaza
> Glynn Foster
> Jeff Waugh
> Jody Goldberg
> Bill Hanneman
> Malcolm Tredinnick
> Mark McLoughlin
> George Lebl
>
> Some of these people are still members of the foundation, but none of
> them have been seen around for a long while.

You have an assumption that when in, people are supposed to stay in for the 
rest of their life.  That assumption is wrong.  People come and go all the 
time.  People move away and work on different things.  Either because of their 
job changes or changing personal interest, or for a whole variety of other 
reasons.  If you want to count all the hackers who once hacked on GNOME but 
don't anymore go ahead, but don't use that to wrongly justify your point.


Cheers,
behdad

> Acceptable collateral damage for having unfettered freedom of speech?
>
> Cheers,
> Dave.