Re:Effective immediately I am stepping down from the Nodejs TSC
by smsm42 on Tuesday August 22, 2017 @12:55PM
(#15074226)
Please tell me that nodejs didn't just have a vote on removing a member because the said member shared an article which was critical of speech codes and implied CoCs can have downsides. And 40% voted for removal. Please tell me it was something more serious and controversial. Because if that's what we arrived at - that the mere implication that you might not be 100% devoted to the orthodoxy, that you might be considering committing a thoughtcrime and questioning the dogma - not denying yet, not even arguing, just thinking about questioning! - you already in serious danger of being ostracized. This is scary as hell.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Effective immediately I am stepping down from the Nodejs TSC
by rndgermandude on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @05:38AM
(#15079939)
As I understand it, it was 20% (2 out of 10) vote for removal, 20% (2 out of 10) abstained and 60% (6 out of 10) voted against removal, which is a little less bad.
Re:Effective immediately I am stepping down from the Nodejs TSC
by turkeysandwich on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @07:11PM
(#15136898)
I think there were thirteen total members.
Two abstained, one member was the person in question, and then we have 6 against removing, and 4 in favor.
And after this vote failed to remove the person, four members resigned.
Re:Effective immediately I am stepping down from the Nodejs TSC
by smsm42 on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @12:23PM
(#15082801)
I heard there were four, but maybe I was wrong. I am still kind of surprised there even was a vote on this. The difference between harassing people and saying "CoC may also have some downsides" should be kinda obvious. Sadly, it's not.
Re:Effective immediately I am stepping down from the Nodejs TSC
by websurfshop on Friday August 25, 2017 @03:16PM
(#15101356)
Can you image if someone openly supported the president? Every flamer says #notmypresident, but "everyone else" is a traitor?