Do communities needs sticks to be driven one sided way like cows?
At this point it feels like they kind of defy their reason to be and are pretty misused.
Or, from his own writing on the subject:
> Eventually that information made it to the Community Working Group (CWG), who concluded "there was no code of conduct violation present for [them] to take any action on".
> Dries, from what I understand, was first informed, without my knowledge, of the matter in early February, by the CWG.
Curious that the CWG referred the matter to him as part of their documented process (i.e. when an issue exceeds the scope of their charter). You may not be inclined to believe a word they say, but at the very least Larry's timeline does not contradict this detail as provided by Megan / Dries:
> The Community Working Group, which is part of Drupal’s governance structure, provided conflict resolution. When it became clear that some of the issues raised went beyond the scope of their charter, they determined that it was appropriate for the matter to be escalated to Dries. This is consistent with their existing policy and process.
The FAQ section on this post provides the clearest timeline from the "other side" that I've seen: https://www.drupal.org/association/blog/working-through-the-...
Regardless, multiple decisions were made before Dries and Larry talked, and it is your characterization of Dries as a meddler who is circumventing a process that I am declaring untrue by anyone's accounting of the facts.
We don't live in a binary world, there are other options here besides Dries abused his power or Dries did everything right... for example, the process itself may be deficient and in need of reform. Before slinging mud, we should at least consider that possibility.
That would require that someone provides some evidence that this had nothing to do with what the accused suggests it's about - as it is, all we have is a short jump from being harassed because Gor to being kicked out of the community. That sort of thing is, unfortunately, quite common - I have friends within the scene who've lost their jobs because someone sent a picture to their bosses. The world is largely not a bastion of tolerance towards people who practice alternative relationship styles and sexualities.
http://buytaert.net/comment/132641#comment-132641
If Preston and other BDSM practitioners like him are fired from Acquia or removed from the Drupal community, I'll eat whatever crow you care to dish up.
If he has harmed someone in the community or been put in a position to harm someone by his place in the community, you'd think Dries would be able to say that. If there's a police investigation or court case sufficiently far along that Dries thinks it's likely it happened, you'd think he'd be able to say that. But he's said absolutely nothing aside from his vague "because equality" statement.
Just write code and stick to business, preferably under a pseudonym. This gets difficult when contributing to projects for which you need to sign a developer agreement for legal reasons though.
I've talked to many people about the matter and some of them say that open source is supposed to be left-leaning, and that those are its principles. That ignores that right-leaning users should also be able to benefit from open source values (privacy, for example) and contribute code, and that not everybody who uses open source has to be a supporter of the open source principles (for example, I use an open source browser because it's the best, not because I like open source better than closed source).
You won't build an open minded community if its rules mandate righthink. Doesn't mean you can't try and protect people from the kind of stalking and abuse that has happened here.
It's a shame that we have to have more than "be professional and don't be a dick" as community guidelines, but if we have to might as well do it correctly.
Unfortunately, my experience is that you actually do need to be able to point to something (a) precise and (b) that the community broadly agrees is a valid reason, in order to kick someone out without practically dissolving your community. A code of conduct is simply an agreement which states the community's beliefs on what are valid reasons to kick someone out.
It's like wearing a cowboy hat to a meeting. It's not that there's anything wrong with the symbol itself, but it perhaps represents some tedious baggage
What are you proposing for a not-left-leaning code of conduct, either neutral or right-leaning?