Sex and Gor and open source
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
So I have a darker take on this: Dries banned Crell as a face-value reason to strip a competitor of a seat at the core contributor table. Crell works for Platform.sh, a challenger to Acquia's main hosting platform product. Drupal has lots of very senior architectural voices already, so losing Crell isn't going to jeopardize the platform, and it's more convenient for Acquia for them to work in the same place.
According to Crell's post about this [https://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/tmi-outing], the Drupal Association apparently attempted to apply their code of conduct and found repeatedly that Crell had done nothing wrong. But then Dries decided to ban Crell with little fanfare. Hard to believe that Dries cares that much about Crell's sex life. Easy to believe that he's become a cutthroat opportunist who would use the Code of Conduct to optimize Acquia's outcomes. What would have happened if Crell had worked for Acquia?
That's the thing about a BDFL. Give him enough VC money and ultimately all that's left is a giant D.
It was also brought up on the related Reddit thread. Someone surmised this might be "motivated by the direct competition."
To which rszrama (Ryan Szarma) said "As a co-founder of Platform.sh, I know with absolute certainty this is not the case."
Assuming Ryan knows more than both of us, and he would be in a position to gain from making such a claim -- it's important to note he emphatically said NO.
https://www.reddit.com/r/drupal/comments/60y9mq/larry_garfie...
I'd argue that Ryan can't really gain from making a claim that Dries is trying to damage his business, because then he's admitting that his business has been damaged without any real recourse. But I do agree that he knows plenty that we don't!
My thesis is not that Crell's behavior was acceptable. I know I don't have the standing to opine on that. My thesis is that Dries isn't accountable for this conflict of interest and the demands of running a venture-backed startup are largely at odds with the demands of running a community worthy of its code of conduct.
Of course, Dries is not the only BDFL with this kind of a conflict of interest. Many of us who have a career on the Internet live in the shade of one tree or another...
It's been a huge obstacle to getting recognition when dealing with Western tech media. Even when I don't appear at all with the project, simply the off-camera creator's appearance being offensive has been sufficient excuse for exclusion. I have no doubt that BDSM enthusiasts, or Furries, or many others face similar issues even when they check all aspects of their lifestyle at the door and it has no bearing on their projects.
As part of a knee-jerk reaction to community problems with sexism, parts of tech are now deeply, deeply conservative and judgmental about anything even vaguely sexual.
You can very easily have permanent damage done to your career prospects by appearing or acting in some way different from what they feel is the norm. Once that's done, there's no appeasement or washing away the stain- you might as well embrace your eccentricity and resign yourself to whatever fringe niche will have you.
It's the perspective of the ousted Drupal member that his beliefs are entirely packaged up in the BDSM subculture that he takes part in, and that to have a problem with his beliefs is to persecute his BDSM subculture.
It's the perspective of the other Drupal members who ousted him that his beliefs are not in fact cabined in that subculture, but in fact bleed out of it into his interactions with the broader world. They cite evidence.
Since the beliefs that we're talking about could be broadly and probably inaccurately but by how much I don't know described as "females are subhuman", it's the perspective of the Drupal members who did the ousting that those beliefs matter very much to the project.
I don't know what the right answer is, but I do know that this TechCrunch article basically defined away the controversy. That doesn't help anyone make sense of it. I'm happy letting the Drupal community work this stuff out for themselves though, and also flagged this story, which is, after all, really just drama.
The article raises questions in the controversy worth exploring in countless open source projects.
I didn't encounter evidence cited by the ousting members in the article. Can you link to your sources?
The comments from the DA side about this have been few and self-contradictory so that partially the reason the article is the way it is.
I didn't see any evidence cited in Dries Buytaert's blog [1] that the ousted member's BDSM stuff affected how he interacted or behaved within the Drupal community. In particular, I didn't see anything cited that indicated they had any problem at all with him until they found out that he was a member of that BDSM community. Did I overlook some evidence?
Edit to be more clear: I can understand either position as long as it applies consistently. I also think I may have pattern matched this incorrectly as "person unfairly ostracized for his personal sexual preferences", when perhaps the part that will get play in the tech community is "woman hating white male", in which case this will fit right in with Eich and Yarvin.
(To your edit: so far as I know, the issue with Yarvin has more to do with outspoken racism than with gender equity).
Generally our attitude toward different sexual preferences (previously labeled 'deviant') is that it is illegal and wrong to use them to hold back somebody's career. However fetishism thus far hasn't been approached the same way as homosexuality, nor has the debate even begun in any public fashion.
I think this debate will have to happen and it's very nuanced.
Even more interestingly, the majority of the fetish/BDSM community is heavily feminist and open minded. (There are always grey nuance and complex case but still) It is a community that is deeply rooted into consent and people that submit making a conscious and informed decision.
You tend to meet people that accept someone else opinion or lifestyle, that are team player and adapt to others, more than proselyts or zealots.
Interestingly, the legal implications are complex, and most of the time, in the US, would not support the lifestyle that much. Consensual non-consent or violence is a strange place legally.
But from the public information so far, it seems hard to believe that this was about proselytising or promoting anything.
Just a witch hunt. Which, to be honest, do not surprise me.
I am semi public about my personal involvement since 50 Shades, because i accept the problem i could get in exchange of informing people that need it (50 shades is hated in a lot of the community for good reasons) It is not easy and you get a lot of anxious/uneasy look.
This tends to be the problem with most of these things. But in any case we really lack information here.
It's interesting to compare this with the TechCrunch article written after Brendan Eich was ousted for his “belief system”: https://techcrunch.com/2014/04/03/brendan-eich-resigns-as-mo...
The Techcrunch article focuses too much on BDSM in general. If I understand correctly, the problem here is on the specific aspect of viewing women as inferior and the fact that this contributor wields significant influence in a community where (like many free software communities) gender is a problem.
This isn't very different than being anti-gay and being the lead of a big free software project. Some people can pretend that their personal opinions have no impact on their work, but that's very rarely the case. If there was more diversity, this would probably be less of an issue.
When it comes to Drupal, the only gender problem it has is the people who keep manufacturing major incidents out of minor slights, even when the people involved don't mind. Case in point, the Drupal Association member who resigned because he called his friend a pussy, who in turn didn't mind it.
It is disingenuous to uphold a code of respect, diversity and inclusion while simultaneously expecting everyone to conform to the wishes of the most easily offended. More so to act like the only way to be respectful to women is to treat them like fragile flowers. Some people prefer traditional gender roles, in or outside the bedroom, and some are women.
The last thing these inclusion activists want is diversity, it would expose them as the sheltered and privileged upper class they are.
From the DCOC: "The Drupal community and its members treat one another with respect."
> When it comes to Drupal, the only gender problem it has is the people who keep manufacturing major incidents out of minor slights [...]
I don't know for Drupal, but gender is an issue in most computer-science related fields, I doubt that Drupal is immune to this. Free Software has a lower % of women involved than computer science in general. In any case, until there is near parity, there is a gender problem.
I agree that 'we' are pretty bad at handling incidents. Damned if we do, damned if we don't. There's been an evolution in the last 10 years, but clearly more work to be done.
Frankly, the DCOC is vague. If we want to kick out people with a reference to the DCOC, we have to define with mathematical precision what is “respect”, “poor manners”, “people outside the Drupal project”.
> I don't know for Drupal, but gender is an issue in most computer-science related fields, I doubt that Drupal is immune to this. Free Software has a lower % of women involved than computer science in general. In any case, until there is near parity, there is a gender problem.
You can always find an aspect which is underrepresented. Gender, ethnicity, solved tickets, religion, eye colour… Can we just focus on getting things done and being a welcoming toward everyone who would like to donate free time until that person does not restrict others to do so?