Posting doxxed information across the internet, along with euphemistic insinuations that he is an irreparable pervert, attached to his real name, forever to show up as the first result when you Google him ... is "not a nice thing to do"
Trying to hold your community leaders up to a higher standard, and refusing to partake in the same backroom whisper campaigns that you're angry about? That's just not even on the same level of "not nice".
Buytaert is wrong, there is really no doubt about that. But if you want to make a point you simply send the letter to its intended recipient and follow up on the threat to leave if you are ignored or unhappy with the outcome.
If you want to increase the spectacle you do so publicly, with the direct result that Drupal gets hurt even further in the process no matter what the outcome will be.
I might agree with you if it were a call to resign or similar, but they aim at getting (to them very relevant) information that has been demanded in public (and I have to assume in private as well) before, without result, not necessarily at a reversal of the decision.
The problem here is that the producers of drupal are a much smaller set of people than the consumers of something like drupal. It's the consumers that will have to decide whether they want to base their next project on Drupal or not and all this infighting is giving of an aura of extreme instability. So as a result the drupal project as a whole will suffer because some fraction of that audience will decide to move on from Drupal.
Using PR-speak to sound reconciliatory while doing the opposite is a game two can play at. It may not be nice either, but it's better than trying to be reasonable against someone arguing in bad faith. That's a recipe for frog boiling and being a pushover. The idea isn't to endlessly escalate, it's to ensure both sides now have something to gain by cooperating and to lose by defecting.
[1] https://twitter.com/stefan_arrr/status/851795109716922370
Agreed. This line in particular got me -
> We unreservedly promise that if you do — but only if you do — we will have your back
Not exactly subtle. I'm surprised so many people put their name to this letter as alleged - I'm guessing they instead 'collected signatures' for a 'petition' then penned/published this - but I seriously doubt that so many would stop interacting with Drupal over this sort of thing. More likely they'd grin-and-bear it and still use the tool for their work, but not participate in the 'community drama'.
Software is ultimately about software, not interpersonal ethics. You can trumpet all you like with these pieces, but at the end of the day the people even reading are a tiny subset of the people using it, and even if they all leave and start advising against it, that software is still a solution in the solution space, viable to many customers who don't know or care about interpersonal dramas within its community.
It's marketing. Nothing new with that.
That must be why they chose to do this in public rather than in a private letter.
As much as I agree with the contents of the letter I reject the way in which it was delivered, it is essentially blackmail. If you don't do 'x' we will leave would have been strong enough without making this yet another public spectacle because it pulls in the world at large to witness whether or not these demands are met.
I can't stand Drupal for many reasons (backwards incompatibility by design being the major one) but this is not a nice thing to do.