Based on the (long) list of reasons he was suspended, it seems like an objectively good thing that he was (and from what you linked it also seems like everything followed the democratic processes...
Based on the (long) list of reasons he was suspended, it seems like an objectively good thing that he was (and from what you linked it also seems like everything followed the democratic processes required). The Python community has enough toxicity problems as-is without it coming from someone in a lifetime leadership role. Its community is very frequently negatively compared to R's by female professionals and academics, in my experience.
At least according to one person, that laundry list of complaints is basically made up. https://chrismcdonough.substack.com/p/the-shameful-defenestration-of-tim I’d recommend reading it in full,...
At least according to one person, that laundry list of complaints is basically made up.
The author of this blog is an outrage merchant who has been part of the anti-diversity attacks on the Nix community, egregiously bending facts to fit a "white cis men are persecuted" narrative....
The author of this blog is an outrage merchant who has been part of the anti-diversity attacks on the Nix community, egregiously bending facts to fit a "white cis men are persecuted" narrative. It's no surprise he's defending Tim.
If we're relying on the words of one person alone to debunk a list of issues, their ethos should be proven. It's not ad hominem to assess whether this person is qualified or trustworthy in the...
If we're relying on the words of one person alone to debunk a list of issues, their ethos should be proven. It's not ad hominem to assess whether this person is qualified or trustworthy in the first place if we're going to declare them arbiter.
All of the claims I make above can be verified by reading the bylaws change Discourse topic, a follwing thread about censure, and a thread about “neurodivergence”, save for the rump of messages that preceded it on PSF-Vote. If I’ve gotten anything wrong, I’ll be happy to retract or correct. While much of the disagreement is down to style and interpretation, I hope you’ll agree that many of the accusations are simply wrong. If past is prelude, this temporary ban without challenge will eventually lead to a permanent one. That would be tragic; not for Timmy, but for Python. (Even worse, you’ll have to read another of my blog posts at that time.)
We are. I don't see a second article from someone else echoing the same defense. That disclaimer doesn't address the concerns above. It's still his article that was linked. It's still just one...
We are. I don't see a second article from someone else echoing the same defense.
That disclaimer doesn't address the concerns above. It's still his article that was linked. It's still just one person's interpretation and reporting of findings. Without knowing their ethos, it's not trustworthy enough. There are concerns about their ethos above that were summarily dismissed but not addressed.
Did you look? https://lunduke.locals.com/post/5985667/python-bans-prominent-dev-for-enjoying-the-wrong-old-snl-sketch I would characterize this article also as being broadly supportive of Tim, and...
We are. I don't see a second article from someone else echoing the same defense.
While not directly addressing Tim, at least two other members resigned over their disagreement with the PSF and the same issues that Tim was concerned about.
Interesting article. I can't resist feeling sad when I see people who stand on the shoulders of giants trying to push away those same giants on the basis of something like CoCs. Especially when...
Interesting article. I can't resist feeling sad when I see people who stand on the shoulders of giants trying to push away those same giants on the basis of something like CoCs. Especially when some of the reasons really seem inane, as they almost always do in similar situations.
It's pretty detailed, and looking over the threads I can see why it's a greyer issue, since a lot of the specific things are less egregious than the vague wording makes it sound. I also don't want...
It's pretty detailed, and looking over the threads I can see why it's a greyer issue, since a lot of the specific things are less egregious than the vague wording makes it sound. I also don't want to imply anything negative about his technical contributions to Python! But reading the linked discussions show Tim stubbornly defending the idea that the Python community has ever been hostile towards certain developers, insisting that it was more welcoming in the good old days because it was also welcoming to developers that "are just plain hard to work with, routinely impatient and dismissive". He says this alongside complaining about how PSF members are terrified of losing their careers because of the CoC WG. While I can see some of the statements he made that people took issue with being the result of poor wording or misunderstanding, his doubling down on the "I did nothing wrong" pedestal rather than simply acknowledging that things came off wrong and apologizing don't do him any favors.
Regardless of the specific comments, ultimately I simply can't respect someone who refuses to acknowledge that Python has ever had a toxicity problem in its community, and having someone like that in a position of leadership would make me much less comfortable coming forward about abuse and toxicity in the Python community. That Python has had problems on this front well into recent decades is extremely obvious -- back before I left Twitter, I'd come across discussion of the Python community's toxicity without even following anyone who mostly talked about Python or coding, just because I followed a handful of women in academia who would tweet frustratedly about their negative experiences with the Python community when it came up (and, as I mentioned in my top comment, they'd often compare it unfavorably to R, which reportedly has a much more inclusive culture). One of Greg Smith's comments includes a portion that very accurately reflects the impression I've gotten:
Members and would be members are quite literally afraid to bring [the behaviors they routinely witness and experience] up publicly because they get jumped on by people telling them they are wrong. They simply do not want to interact in our spaces at all which means they remain invisible and even when some are brave enough to speak up, as has happened multiple times in these threads, they appear to often be ignored. It is shameful.
The number of people I’ve worked with who would’ve made great open source contributors, here or elsewhere, who’ve effectively turned tail and said “hell no!” to the suggestion because of how they see people get treated by those already in this pool is more than I can count. :frowning:
We still have a lot of improving to do.
It's definitely not a black and white situation, and I can understand reasonable people opposing Tim's suspension based on the info here. But I think calling it made-up is simply overlooking some of the serious problems with Tim's view towards the Python community and the tenor of his commentary on these issues.
A nice bit of insight into the governance and operation that underlies Python.
I wonder what he thinks of Tim Peters and that whole debacle.
Based on the (long) list of reasons he was suspended, it seems like an objectively good thing that he was (and from what you linked it also seems like everything followed the democratic processes required). The Python community has enough toxicity problems as-is without it coming from someone in a lifetime leadership role. Its community is very frequently negatively compared to R's by female professionals and academics, in my experience.
At least according to one person, that laundry list of complaints is basically made up.
https://chrismcdonough.substack.com/p/the-shameful-defenestration-of-tim
I’d recommend reading it in full, it’s detailed.
The author of this blog is an outrage merchant who has been part of the anti-diversity attacks on the Nix community, egregiously bending facts to fit a "white cis men are persecuted" narrative. It's no surprise he's defending Tim.
Did you read the article, or are you dismissing it purely ad hominem?
If we're relying on the words of one person alone to debunk a list of issues, their ethos should be proven. It's not ad hominem to assess whether this person is qualified or trustworthy in the first place if we're going to declare them arbiter.
But, are we?
From the article,
We are. I don't see a second article from someone else echoing the same defense.
That disclaimer doesn't address the concerns above. It's still his article that was linked. It's still just one person's interpretation and reporting of findings. Without knowing their ethos, it's not trustworthy enough. There are concerns about their ethos above that were summarily dismissed but not addressed.
Did you look?
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/5985667/python-bans-prominent-dev-for-enjoying-the-wrong-old-snl-sketch
I would characterize this article also as being broadly supportive of Tim, and at least not supportive of the SC.
https://lwn.net/Articles/988894/
While not directly addressing Tim, at least two other members resigned over their disagreement with the PSF and the same issues that Tim was concerned about.
https://discuss.python.org/t/why-i-am-withdrawing-fellowship-status-in-psf/58301
https://discuss.python.org/t/im-leaving-too/58408
Also, the majority of HN threads appear to be in favour of Tim.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41314393
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41234180
Interesting article. I can't resist feeling sad when I see people who stand on the shoulders of giants trying to push away those same giants on the basis of something like CoCs. Especially when some of the reasons really seem inane, as they almost always do in similar situations.
It's pretty detailed, and looking over the threads I can see why it's a greyer issue, since a lot of the specific things are less egregious than the vague wording makes it sound. I also don't want to imply anything negative about his technical contributions to Python! But reading the linked discussions show Tim stubbornly defending the idea that the Python community has ever been hostile towards certain developers, insisting that it was more welcoming in the good old days because it was also welcoming to developers that "are just plain hard to work with, routinely impatient and dismissive". He says this alongside complaining about how PSF members are terrified of losing their careers because of the CoC WG. While I can see some of the statements he made that people took issue with being the result of poor wording or misunderstanding, his doubling down on the "I did nothing wrong" pedestal rather than simply acknowledging that things came off wrong and apologizing don't do him any favors.
Regardless of the specific comments, ultimately I simply can't respect someone who refuses to acknowledge that Python has ever had a toxicity problem in its community, and having someone like that in a position of leadership would make me much less comfortable coming forward about abuse and toxicity in the Python community. That Python has had problems on this front well into recent decades is extremely obvious -- back before I left Twitter, I'd come across discussion of the Python community's toxicity without even following anyone who mostly talked about Python or coding, just because I followed a handful of women in academia who would tweet frustratedly about their negative experiences with the Python community when it came up (and, as I mentioned in my top comment, they'd often compare it unfavorably to R, which reportedly has a much more inclusive culture). One of Greg Smith's comments includes a portion that very accurately reflects the impression I've gotten:
It's definitely not a black and white situation, and I can understand reasonable people opposing Tim's suspension based on the info here. But I think calling it made-up is simply overlooking some of the serious problems with Tim's view towards the Python community and the tenor of his commentary on these issues.