News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by mycroftiv on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @11:07PM (#2605773)
This is a very good feature, but I am also afraid it will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change. "If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent. The fact that controversy and negativity attracts eyeballs and can trigger improvements is understandable, but it also creates perverse incentives.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by compay on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @11:14PM (#2605796)
Sometimes you have to look at what somebody says, and not how they say it. I personally wouldn't have approached the trolls the way Zed did, but he was right that this was broken and needed to be fixed. Github did a great job - as far as I can tell they handled things professionally and cranked out a fix in just a few days. Everybody wins (except the trolls).
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by endlessvoid94 on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @12:45AM (#2605989)
I do not agree. You can't simply ignore HOW somebody says something. How you say something almost more important than what you say.

If Zed hadn't written a blog post detailing how he fucked everything up (in all his greatness, apparently) it wouldn't have gotten such exposure and would likely have died out.

He had to make his point with a hammer or it wouldn't have mattered. And it's unfortunate that it took a hammer to make the point. I'd even go so far as to say this feature isn't actually all that important. Zed Shaw just MADE it important.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by zedshaw on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @01:59AM (#2606156)
> If Zed hadn't written a blog post detailing how he fucked everything up (in all his greatness, apparently) it wouldn't have gotten such exposure and would likely have died out.

Can you explain where in my blog post I claim I'm great? I think all I did was explain what was happening and how this was someone who bothered me in the past and followed me to github, and then there was nothing I could do about it.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by endlessvoid94 on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @02:14AM (#2606191)
I guess I figured it was implied. With your influence, you totally could've emailed the github guys and voice your concerns privately. Instead, you chose to do your own thing and publicize it and how awesomely you pwned the dude.

And then you claimed it was all to improve the github experience. Cmon.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by zedshaw on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @02:35AM (#2606235)
So, you basically were stirring up drama by exaggerating what I said for effect, yet I'm the drama queen and attention whore.

Next time, actually read what I write instead of just imagining you read it after seeing a stream of tweets and your buddies on reddit tell it to you 4th person in some comments. For example, I didn't contact github because I knew one of the peole working there was in on the joke. If you read what I wrote you would have known that, idiot.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by pjhyett on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:41AM (#2606408)
> For example, I didn't contact github because I knew one of the peole working there was in on the joke.

For the record, this isn't true no matter how many times you repeat it. You should have emailed us and we would have taken care of it without a holiday weekend filled with unnecessary drama.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by jasonlotito on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @07:58AM (#2606878)
> For the record, this isn't true no matter how many times you repeat it.

What it looks like from an outsider: He said, (s)he said.

I don't know if Zed is right. I don't know if you are right. What I do know is Zed Shaw ranted and got stuff fixed. Apparently, their was some merit to what he was saying, and at least the majority of his story can confirmed to be true. As for the employee, it's just as easy for you to be misinformed or simply ignorant of the truth as it is for Zed to be wrong. No malice, just mistaken.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by davidw on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @08:21AM (#2606936)
Here's another data point: when Zed went off on Debian, he was either really mistaken or simply imagining things that have no connection with reality.

> This is what Debian maintainers are doing, but there's a very specific reason why they do this and it's not a "culture clash". It's embrace and extend which they probably learned from Microsoft. You see, if you have to adapt your software and processes to their weird layout and packages, then you can't get off their platform. It is sadly pure business and has nothing to do with open source, quality, or culture.

> It's simply a tactic to make sure that you are stuck on Debian.

Whether you like Debian and agree with their technical decisions, or not, it's a non-profit completely based on open-source code. There is no business, and there is no motivation to lock you in to Debian, and there is no desire to do so, either. Complaining about Debian in technical terms is fine; making stuff up about the project is beyond the pale.

After that episode, I became much more inclined to take what Zed has to say with a large grain of salt.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by jasonlotito on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @09:20AM (#2607106)
> After that episode, I became much more inclined to take what Zed has to say with a large grain of salt.

Like I said, it's essentially a he said, she said match. github, if anything, let themselves get pulled into it. Just fix the problem and move on. The only they've done is make note of what they disagree with (and frankly, their denials don't match up with what Zed accused anyways).

I learned a long time ago that as a company, you should avoid getting into a pissing contest on the forums.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by Locke1689 on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:25AM (#2606365)
Hey Zed, I appreciate your hyperbolic writing style and I think the point you made was well thought out and well presented the first time, but this kind of mudslinging just isn't necessary. Just take the high road on this comment.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by enanoretozon on Thursday June 02, 2011 @09:40AM (#2611906)
"For example, I didn't contact github because I knew one of the peole working there was in on the joke."

hmm, couldn't it be that some other customer service people would actually do their job about your issue? How do you know it would all be channeled through this one guy that was in on the joke? In any case if they did ignore your request, you could still do the whole crashing thing...

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by rycole on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:02AM (#2606306)
You sure do enjoy referring to yourself as a queen, don't you? Hrm.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by rimantas on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @02:22AM (#2606213)

  > Can you explain where in my blog post I claim I'm great?
Maybe people still remember this: http://web.archive.org/web/20090218021137/http://zedshaw.com... Sure you try to mask it as an attempt to be funny, but even if "it’s all an act" that acts make the person. Now I am off to http://bellard.org/ to clean my mind a bit.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by wazoox on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @02:32AM (#2606234)
Come on, admit that Zed is funny with style. He's bragging, too, but it's never condescending. That's the difference between a gentleman and dandy, and an ugly troll.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by rimantas on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @09:27AM (#2607136)
No, I won't admit that. His writing just makes me sad.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by wazoox on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @12:08PM (#2607899)
I'm sorry for you. Many of his rants made me laugh to tears. And more generally, did "Learning Python the hard way" make you sad, really ?
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by rimantas on Thursday June 02, 2011 @10:42AM (#2612154)
No need to be sad. I enjoy humor a lot, only not the Zed's kind. I did not ready LPTHW, but might some day :)
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by eropple on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @11:32AM (#2607704)
Grow a sense of humor.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by rimantas on Thursday June 02, 2011 @10:40AM (#2612145)
You know, I grew in the society which had a lot of problems and a consequence grew a very good sense of humor (and that without laugh tracks). If someone thinks that Zed's writing is funny they still have a lot to discover.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by catch23 on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @01:14AM (#2606064)
You still have to admit that zed went through a lot of trouble just to stop the harassment. I'd probably make a blog post too if the harassment went on for as long as it did for zed.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by zedshaw on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @01:57AM (#2606152)
I love how you're this paragon of stoic virtue, and I'm a drama queen, yet, here you are talking about it even more instead of ignoring it and going back to whatever it was you were doing.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by mycroftiv on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @06:15AM (#2606684)
Thanks for the reply, and your accusation of hypocrisy has some justice to it. I actually have a lot of respect for you and appreciate your projects and most of your writing, but I still don't think you handled this entire situation as well as you could have. I apologize if some of my vocabulary ("tantrum") is itself an example of what I was criticizing.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by overcyn on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @02:58AM (#2606300)
Theres a difference between discussing the concept of "internet drama" and actually creating "internet drama". Mycroftiv is doing the former whereas you do the latter.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by ctide on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:00AM (#2606305)
You do realize that discussing internet drama is what spurs people to create internet drama, right?
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by danssig on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:36AM (#2606393)
I don't understand this bizarre desire to resort to acrobatics to paint anyone who ever opens their mouth as a hypocrite. Do you really want everyone to just shut up about everything? Then doesn't that make you a hypocrite?
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by overcyn on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:16AM (#2606344)
What I mean to say is, OP is talking about internet drama as a whole and how this incident sets a bad example for the community. And I realize that simply because Zed is even mentioned a certain amount of drama is brought in but the intent is clearly different.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by ramchip on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:12AM (#2606329)
Citation needed. This doesn't look self-evident at all to me.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by ctide on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:28AM (#2606371)
The goal of internet drama is to make the instigator and everyone they know laugh at what they've done. The initial 'poke' will generate some of that, but a 'successful' attack will generate days of discussion that 'everyone' laughs at. I get that there are lots of people who don't understand this on this forum, but, asking for citations to understand concepts that are described on wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drama) is a bit ridiculous, don't you agree?
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by mcosta on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @07:02AM (#2606764)
A situation is not an "internet drama" by itself. It needs people talking and/or arguing about it. It is evident to me.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by rhizome on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @11:45PM (#2605860)
Just because you can identify the mechanism by which this most-basic feature of social networks was implemented, that doesn't mean that it's a bad thing.

The cart should not be put before the horse by implying that this missing feature was simply used as an excuse to be negative. What's the perverse incentive here, that it's actually in GitHub's interest to prevent users from blocking each other?

"The squeaky wheel gets the grease" and public shame were invented way before the Internet, so this makes no precedent. It's just one of the myriad ways in which things get done. Ever had a boss?

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by trafficlight on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @11:52PM (#2605875)
Ralph Nader was also pretty good at it.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by chollida1 on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @11:54PM (#2605878)
> will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change.

To be fair, in this case, that does appear to be exactly what happened. Github had a problem. Someone exposed it and then Zed used his considerable influence to "force" github to fix it.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by marcusbooster on Tuesday May 31, 2011 @11:11PM (#2605789)
You could chalk it up to stress testing that pointed out a flaw. And to GitHub's credit they provided a quick fix and a professional response, kudos to them. Peace has been restored in the Valley, and the trolls are left to twiddle their ASCII dongs.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by jerf on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @12:31AM (#2605954)
'"If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent.'

Perhaps so, but Zed Shaw is not the one that set it. The age of the phrase "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" is measured in decades, not days.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by chittis on Thursday June 02, 2011 @05:38AM (#2611285)
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by jerf on Thursday June 02, 2011 @02:11PM (#2613185)
I actually wanted to say that, but couldn't establish it quickly. Plus days -> decades is a bit more euphonious, so I didn't fight it too hard.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by odiroot on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @03:19AM (#2606351)
In my opinion, they should thank Zed. Github missed a really important issue and he proved it. First thing in social and content driven system is to spam-proof it. Especially that Github is all about productivity.
Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by bxr on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @12:20AM (#2605941)
>"If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent.

Its unfortunate for many reasons, not the least of which is that they either were, or were perceived as (which is just as bad for the customer), so out of touch with the user base that such action was necessary.

>it also creates perverse incentives

No, it was created by a general disregard for customer service. The attitude that an issue is fine to ignore unless it is boiling over is what created the incentive, that was ages ago.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by aplusbi on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @02:37PM (#2608666)
I don't know much about github's customer service,= but from what I can extrapolate from Shaw's rant, their service had a flaw which was likely just an oversight. Shaw never made an attempt to contact github about it (under the belief that they were in on it) and instead chose to exploit another flaw in their service and then angrily blog about it.

I don't see how that makes github "out of touch" nor do I see how this situation was created by a "general disregard of customer service." Granted this might be true, but it doesn't sound like it had anything to do with this particular incident.

Re:GitHub: Block the Bullies by bad_user on Wednesday June 01, 2011 @01:57AM (#2606150)
At least he's a creative dick.