Apache foundation ousts TinkerPop project co-founder for tweeting 'offensive humor that borders on hate speech'

The Apache Software Foundation (ASF) has removed Marko Rodriguez from the TinkerPop project he co-founded because his provocative Twitter posts were said to have violated the ASF Code of Conduct. "I was removed from the project I started 11 years ago for 'publishing offensive humor that borders on hate speech,'" Rodriguez …

[jake]

Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

... Who gave you the right to abuse that name? I mean, really, "a patchy server"? Talk about offensive! (And yes, that IS where the name came from, regardless of any latter-day adjustment to their creation story.)

As for that feather you use as a logo, do you have any idea what that means? You have NOT earned the right to wear that feather. I demand you remove it immediately, and issue an apology for it's misuse.

Typical fucking holier-than-thou fuckheads.

[Charlie Clark]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

It is probably only a matter of time before someone has an attack of fake conscience and decides to spend a shedload of cash "rebranding" the Apache Software Foundation into something vaguely progressive but essentially bland and innocuous…

Because rebranding the foundation is a whole lot cheaper than returning the land but makes still gives us a nice warm feeling about how much we do care.

[jilocasin]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

How about;

A-patchy Software Foundation

Their symbol can be a ball of multicolored/broken wires with a few sticking out.

[jake]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

"Their symbol can be a ball of multicolored/broken wires with a few sticking out."

That would infringe on Airspeeder's image in the public eye, wouldn't it?

[TheWeetabix]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

Sir, I'll ask you to warn people before posting such things.

The air is very dry here in Alberta, and a bellylaugh can turn into a hacking cough quite quickly.

Icon because they don't have a dirty-screen-from-coughing icon.

[Muppet Boss]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

>As for that feather you use as a logo, do you have any idea what that means? You have NOT earned the right to wear that feather. I demand you remove it immediately, and issue an apology for it's misuse.

Having thought of that, the ASF seem to culturally appropriate and even trademark the Apache name, and the Apache natives are clearly under-represented on the ASF board. I believe that the ASF does not have any right to use any references to the Apache culture in their naming and branding unless at least 50% of their board is represented by the Apaches. Or they should choose a name that is not offensive to anyone, like Doing Ignorant Censoring Kills Software foundation or other appropriate name of their choosing.

[bpfh]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

The Cherokees are moaning about Chrysler’s use of their tribe name as mentioned today on the BBC’s site, saying they do not feel honoured by having their tribe name on a car, so in that light, Hughes^M^M^MMcDonnell Douglas^M^M^MBoeing need to rename one of their helicopters, and the ASF needs to drop that same A. If you are going to be painfully petty and politically correct, you can’t have a two speed system.

Also, these codes of conduct to enforce PC, ensure people don’t rock the boat and toe the party line will only end in tears. I wonder what Jobs, Ballmer and Ellison would have become if they got their butts in a sling every time they went on a power-rant!

[jake]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

They've been selling Jeep Cherokees for almost 50 years ... Methinks it's a trifle late to bitch about it now. It'll be interesting to see what SCotUS has to say about it when it gets to that level ... and you know it will.

On the other hand, there are Adult ways of handling this kind of thing. See the Florida Seminoles, for a good example.

Note that mine was pointing out how petty and hypocritical the ASF is being.

[Col_Panek]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

Uh oh, FoMoCo has a brand named for a unwoke former President, whose name is being removed from California schools and avenues.

[jake]

Re: Hey, Apache Software Foundation ...

George Washington was an unapologetic slave owner.

So was Christopher Columbus.

Shirley we'll have to rename Washington D.C. ... twice.

_{It'll still stink to high heaven, though ...}

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know why there is such a fuss over this.

Obviously, from the ASF board's standpoint this met the very definition of hate speech - speech they hated to hear (or see).

Removed because of comments made on a private Twitter account with 45 followers. What next? Microphones installed in your bedroom to make sure you are not speaking in violation of their code? Implants in your brain to make sure you are not thinking the same? Ugh!

[Lysenko]

Re: I don't know why there is such a fuss over this.

Don't think.

If you think, then don't speak.

If you think and speak, then don't write.

If you think, speak and write, then don't sign.

If you think, speak, write and sign, then don't be surprised.

Soviet joke - Stalin era.

[naive]

Re: I don't know why there is such a fuss over this.

Indeed, everywhere we see a repetition of what happened in the Soviet Union during the 30's.

You are not what you can do, you are what you think.

If you don't think like us, your right to exist ceased to be.

We all know the results of this group think, Russia is still recovering 90 years later.

[TimMaher]

Russia is still recovering...

Maybe not.

Have you seen the news that they are considering re-installing the statue of Iron Felix, from where it was toppled, some thirty years ago?

It’s opposite the old KGB headquarters.

That should appeal to the revisionists who like to pretend that he was a good guy.

To quote a Soviet era joke in today’s Independent:- “Papa, is it true Dzerzhinsky loved children?” “Yes, son, he only despised their parents.”

[Muppet Boss]

Re: Russia is still recovering...

>>We all know the results of this group think, Russia is still recovering 90 years later.

>Maybe not.

Certainly not, Russia has long since taken the vaccine against Communism as their say there. The cancel culture surely looks very much like a Communist thing circa Orwellian times (before it all turned into a farce) with a hint of US boycott traditions; people in Russia tend to laugh about the Western attempts at cancel culture like in 'oh dear, now You Too'.

[amacater]

Re: I don't know why there is such a fuss over this.

There is no difference between Russia and America: Both enjoy full freedom of speech.

In America you may also enjoy freedom after speech.

Similar period joke.

[jake]

Re: I don't know why there is such a fuss over this.

Today's kids would do well to listen to, and understand, Tom Robinson's song "Power in the Darkness" from 1978.

The slope is very slippery. Which side of the line are you on?

[Dr Scrum Master]

Re: I don't know why there is such a fuss over this.

What next? Microphones installed in your bedroom to make sure you are not speaking in violation of their code?

I believe the SNP are already planning that...

[Potemkine!]

words fly away, writings remain.

If you want to express something stupid, say it, don't write it.

It's a reality: you cannot laugh about anything with anybody, so grow up and stop acting like a spoiled brat.

[MrBanana]

Re: words fly away, writings remain.

"If you want to express something stupid, say it, don't write it."

In the UK both can be prosecuted equally - libel or slander, take your pick.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: words fly away, writings remain.

Libel is its own evidence. For slander you need someone prepared to stand up in court to give evidence and can cross-examine them.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: words fly away, writings remain.

> For slander you need someone prepared to stand up in court to give evidence and can cross-examine them.

So a legless man cannot sue for slander?

(sorry!)

[jake]

Re: words fly away, writings remain.

Have a beer!

_{just doing my part, contributing to the delinquency ...}

[Ian Mason]

Re: words fly away, writings remain.

"Your right leg, I like. I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role. That's what I said when I saw you come in. I said, "A lovely leg for the role". I've got nothing against your right leg. The trouble is – neither have you."

[NanoMeter]

How even dare you to question identity politics and woke culture?

You really must be a Qtard or a Trumptard...

That's how black and white politics has become after four years of Trump.

Extremists on both ends of the scala wants to decide what you should think.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: How even dare you to question identity politics and woke culture?

"That's how black and white politics has become"

Are you allowed to say that?

In reality what's at the root of this issue goes back some way beyond Trump. Society is going through one of its puritan phases. It happens.

Reactions happen too. At some point everyone will start pointing and laughing at the PC/Woke mob.

[Claptrap314]

Re: How even dare you to question identity politics and woke culture?

Except we've been doing that since the eighties, that I know of. The term "politically correct" was coined precisely to mock this garbage, and it has done nothing but get worse for the last >30 years.

This is being driven through the education & entertainment industries. We erred badly when we decided to allow whomever to control education.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: How even dare you to question identity politics and woke culture?

This is an oscillation with a very long period of the order of a couple of centuries although it seems to be shortening. There was puritanism in the C17th and Victorian Prudery in the C19th. But change will happen.

[jake]

Re: How even dare you to question identity politics and woke culture?

The change is happening. Look where the thumbs are pointing in these comments.

[Claptrap314]

Re: How even dare you to question identity politics and woke culture?

Check the trend on the way the thumbs have gone on variations of this topic for the last couple of years. In this particular case, the cancel-mob has been so extreme that currently folks are pulling back. Some.

Moreover, looking at the comments of mine that have been moderated in this forum, shows things getting markedly worse in the last three months.

[claimed]

Wrong to kick him out

But also wrong to think free speech means "say anything without consequences"

Americans, before you hit that down vote button, here is a list of things not protected by the Holy constitution:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

I am so bored of Americans thinking they have a perfect system, all the while quoting Amendments to the system...

[needmorehare]

What free speech?

I thought a pre-requisite for free speech is freedom of expression and surely a pre-requisite of that is not being a slave?

According to the US constitution, slavery is still a valid punishment the moment someone is convicted of a crime. Which means you can take away someone’s freedom, including their freedom of expression, by creating arbitrary laws which enslave those who may think or act a certain way, independent of their codified civil liberties.

[jake]

Re: What free speech?

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

Society has rules and regs. Break them, go to jail. Dont like the rules and regs? Get enough people together who agree with you and change them. In this country, it is not only possible, it happens.

::shrugs::

[MachDiamond]

Re: What free speech?

"According to the US constitution, slavery is still a valid punishment the moment someone is convicted of a crime."

Not slavery, but confinement.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

> But also wrong to think free speech means "say anything without consequences"

There cannot be free speech without freedom from consequences, else the fear of consequences will stifle the speech and it is no longer free.

Whether that would be a good thing or not is a matter of opinion, but it is not free speech.

[nintendoeats]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

Read your John Stuart Mill (I know, he's like wallpaper paste, but it's important stuff). One underlying principle of western democracy is that the government cannot impose consequences for non-violent action, but private individuals can. This means that ethics and cultural norms can still exist, but they are driven by the people as a group instead of by a central authority (which can still serve as a moderating force to prevent ground-up enforcement of morals from being too violent or otherwise extreme).

That said, when we have business entities more powerful than governments, it is my view that they must be treated as the central authority and not as "private individuals". But that's not strictly related to this article.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

If you don't like Mill, then Boswell's Life of Johnson is an easier read. Paraphrasing a lot, Johnson discussed the idea that there are things which are not illegal but are contrary to society, using the example of someone stealing your silver spoons:

You can think what you like, and nobody will be any the wiser.

You can say that you want to steal my silver, and society will keep you out of its house.

You reach out to take it, the Law takes place, and you are hanged.

The internet has allowed people to be completely anonymous, and some of them have chosen to act like arseholes. But society judges people for what they say, and how they act. It always has.

[jake]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

Actually, it is related to this article. We have a business entity telling someone what they can an cannot say in their spare time, away from that entity.

ASF is attempting to stifle free speech, with the penalty of ostracism for those who refuse to march in lock-step even in their private time. This is one of the most evil things humans do to each other.

[jtaylor]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

We have a business entity telling someone what they can an cannot say in their spare time, away from that entity.

This isn't just some random "business entity" telling random "someone" what they can say. It's a Board of Directors enforcing the Code of Conduct for a member of that Board. That's significant: Directors represent the organization when they interact with the public. The concept of "away from that entity" is limited. This responsibility is part of the job.

tl;dr: Directors should not "troll" their stakeholders (investors, employees, public, customers...) Salespeople should not "troll" their stakeholders (customers, boss). If you do, accept the consequences.

[jake]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

That's a nice opinion piece, jtaylor.

Sadly for your opinion, however, Mr. Rodriguez was not a member of the ASF board. He is the co-founder of a bit of FOSS code that currently hangs out under the auspices of the ASF.

[iron]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

Try walking into a theatre and shouting FIRE or a plane and shouting HIJACK! We'll see how your consequence free speech gets on.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

Who claimed that anywhere allowed consequence-free speech?

[claimed]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

That guy... in the article...

""If speech is not allowed to be offensive, it would not need protection," he said"

Implying you can say offensive things and not get told off, kicked out of clubs, or otherwise see... consequences

[jake]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

No, implying that I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will fight for your right to say it. Just not necessarily in my livingroom.

Note that "the guy" you quoted isn't the main subject of TOA.

Also note that the other guy, who was that subject, didn't say those things in the ASF's livingroom.

[tekHedd]

Fire, theater, flawed

You discredit your own cause by using flawed examples like these.

I'm not saying I disagree with the underlying goal of this argument, but the "fire in a crowded theater" example is a terrible one. It's not an example of the free speech issue in any sense, and only survives because people on both sides of the issue are too lazy to think for 5 seconds.

[jake]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

" am so bored of Americans thinking they have a perfect system, all the while quoting Amendments to the system..."

You are only bored because you haven't bothered trying to understand how it works. Nobody important ever said it was perfect. The amendment process was built into the system. Seems the Founders realized that society is not static.

[claimed]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

Sorry, jake, the amendments are part of the system, so the system is actually really great and working fine? Some might say, working perfectly?

[jake]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

Why do people like you insist on putting words in other people's mouths? I made no such claim, and you know it.

[claimed]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

In this case, because I thought it was funny; If you refer to my original comment, I'm worse, I'm putting *thoughts in your head*!

Anyway, it's called communication. You say something, I interpret it, vice versa. That being the entire premise upon which 'free speech' is based upon, the possibility of you getting upset by something I said but didn't mean - or have I not bothered to understand it?

[jake]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

So you can't even bother to try to make yourself understood?

Fair enough. I'll ignore you now.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Wrong to kick him out

"" am so bored of Americans thinking they have a perfect system, all the while quoting Amendments to the system...""

Time was of the essence. What is in the US Constitution is the low hanging fruit. The things that every one involved was willing to sign off immediately. Many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights were close, but needed discussion which is why they were ratified later and as one document. A few of them need clarification as times have changed. Should a person "being secure in their papers" apply to digital files? How about when they are under 100 miles from the US border? How about property? That would seem to exclude Civil Asset Forfeiture. While those examples don't necessarily need another amendment, they do need clarification by the Supreme Court but it's a slow and expensive process.

[Anonymous Coward]

How refreshing!

I think it is great to see people like Marko and Niclas having the testicular fortitude to stand up to the humourless "woke" mob and expose them as the real fascists they are.

Here's a nice cold beer for you both.

[Naich]

Re: How refreshing!

Jesus, it's like the Daily Mail comments section in here. The poor petals can't even be racist these days without it having some consequences.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: How refreshing!

It had been obvious that the definition of "racist" was being stretched for a long while but most people hadn't said anything in opposition for fear of being branded "racist" themselves.

The tipping point actually came when the extreme lefties doing the screaming about racism were actually proven to be the nastiest and scariest antisemitic (and therefore by definition) racist nutters in the country by a mile. All along these nasty pieces of work had been pointing fingers at everybody else and screaming to deflect attention from themselves.

And then we reached the critical point; one day the people who had been used to summoning a lynch mob on command called for one, and screamed "mob him" then wondered why everybody lynched the person trying to form the lynch mob instead of their commanded target.

[jake]

Re: How refreshing!

So, Naich, you and your chosen few are allowed to call people names, but people you don't like are evil when they do the same? Do you know what the word hypocrite means?

[Naich]

Re: How refreshing!

You might want to look up what "racism" is.

[jake]

Re: How refreshing!

I know what racism is, TYVM. Nowhere in its definition does it say that name-calling is a good idea, not even in response to name-callers.

[Doctor Syntax]

Chucking out one of the founders of your project who is also one of the domain experts is just asking to get forked. Assuming he cares enough - and if he no longer cares about it it doesn't show your project in too good a light.

[jake]

Even if he doesnlt care anymore ...

... it would be fun to see him fork it and see who follows him. I'd find it absolutely hysterical if he took the bulk of the existing developers with him, and then (if he truly has no interest in the project anymore) quietly passed the reins and dropped out, point made.

[Howard Sway]

"The tweets in question were obvious satire"

I've just read them, so here's my take : they weren't obvious satire. Because satire is the use of wit to reveal underlying hypocrisy and other forms of bunkum.

They were a poor attempt at it. Just tweeting "Heroic free speech warrior cancelled by <insert minority group here>" is professional victimhood, just as much as that of the supposed woke oppressors who you say "monopolize the ideology of the people". And the culture warriors expending vast amounts of effort fighting for their free speech rights which are in reality under no threat whatsoever are just as humourless and single-issue obsessed as the overenthusiastic woke student activists. Who don't run the world, and will mostly grow out of it once they have to engage with the real imperfect complex world as it actually is when they leave the student bubble. And the most painfully right-on amongst them generally tend to turn into the most reactionary right wingers once they get older.

[Juillen 1]

Re: "The tweets in question were obvious satire"

The thing is, this is exactly the kind of stuff that's chanted by the groups he's parodying (almost exactly), and they get celebrated, and posted as "See how evil the world is to these people because they feel that they're not getting what they want". And when something is posted from a differing group with almost exactly the same wording (and in an absolutely tiny forum, so small as to be vanishingly trivial), it's enough for someone to be cancelled from something they've devoted a decade to.

That's my take on what made this a parody; the exact wording of the woke studenthood but applied from a different demographic. And watch with interest at how they react when their own words are thrown back at them (hint, it's outrage, when they expect someone to bow to them and say how wise and perceptive they are when they say it).

This is not "Remove a significant contributor from a project" material. It's a "Stop being juvenile. You may have a point in stirring stuff up, but you've got bigger fish to fry, and you'll feel much better just getting on with productive stuff instead of wallowing in the sewers of wokehood" kind of stuff.

[JulieM]

Obligatory XKCD

https://xkcd.com/1357/

There are already enough real racists, misogynists, homophobes and others in the world, without the need for anybody else to pretend to be such in the name of humour. A joke will never be funny as long as the thing being joked about actually happens in real life.

[Lysenko]

Re: Obligatory XKCD

There are already enough kulaks, infidels, bourgeoise, heretics, capitalists, communists, atheists, syndicalists, fundamentalists, illegals, colonials, greens, reds, whites, blues, anarchists, syndicalists, Trotskyists ................. and others in the world, without ................

[Juillen 1]

Re: Obligatory XKCD

You've obviously never worked in a critical role.

I'm in the healthcare sector, and believe me, there's a very dark sense of humour that pervades most of the disciplines. If you don't laugh about a stress factor, it can overwhelm you when it shouldn't.

The things being joked about will always be prevalent in the world as long as there are patients, trauma and so on.

What you've just effectively said right there is "I'd prefer people to suffer psychologically rather than find an outlet. I'd rather masses suffer so the odd edge case doesn't have to cope with small potential affront.".

Now that being said, dark humour and satire are best done with wit. It makes it more obvious it's satire, but not everybody has that social dexterity, so sometimes things come out as not particularly funny. In which case, pause for flat reception, and just move on.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Obligatory XKCD

> You've obviously never worked in a critical role.

> I'm in the healthcare sector, and believe me, there's a very dark sense of humour that pervades most of the disciplines. If you don't laugh about a stress factor, it can overwhelm you when it shouldn't.

Or as the saying goes: if you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined.

Truer words have never been spoken. Former emergency services here.

[jake]

Re: Obligatory XKCD

It even has a name ... Hospital Humo(u)r.

Sadly, a friend that works at the local hospital says it is now frowned upon. And the staff are feeling the effects of not having that release. Which is inevitably being transferred to the patients. Which does absolutely nothing for their over-all health.

One wonders how M*A*S*H would be received by today's television audience ... or even if it would have made it past today's network censors in the first place. Would the BBC allow Blackadder if it were pitched today? How about Are You Being Served?

Here's a good one ... Disney has started to stream Jim Henson's original "The Muppet Show" on Disney+. But these days it comes with an offensive content disclaimer. Really. You can't make this shit up.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Obligatory XKCD

> One wonders how M*A*S*H would be received by today's television audience ... or even if it would have made it past today's network censors in the first place. Would the BBC allow Blackadder if it were pitched today? How about Are You Being Served?

Until now I had never thought that M*A*S*H and Are You Being Served? could even appear in the same sentence.

Now all I can think about is a camp hospital comedy called "Are You Being Saved?"

[j.bourne]

Re: Obligatory XKCD

Are you being saved?

A new puppet show from Jim Henson. Have a pint. :D

[jake]

Re: Obligatory XKCD

The fifth panel is a lie. It should read "It's just that the people presumed to be in charge don't like it when people don't march in thought-step with them". I invite you to fill in the sixth panel at your leisure (which is, in an of itself, an anathema to those presumed to be in charge ... ).

It's funny, left-wing-nuts used to invite the differently thinking into their ranks. Now thinking differently is considered evil, just like the right-wing-nuts. That's why I lump 'em all together and just call 'em what they are ... collectively, they are wingnuts, and all equally dangerous.

[iron]

> those people always assume he's a Trump supporter. "I’ve never voted," he said. "I simply don’t care."

That is actually worse! You had a chance to vote against Trump (or Biden) but you just couldn't give a shit.

It wasn't long ago that people went to prison and died so that the common man and woman could vote but you don't give a shit. You don't care about your community so why should we give a shit what happens to you?

[Charlie Clark]

Not voting in a democracy is always an option. We've got elections here later this year and I currently have not idea who to vote for, though I know who I'd like to vote against! None of the above should be an option.

[MJB7]

Not voting in a democracy is always an option

You can easily write "None of the above" on a ballot. That's spoiling your ballot and will be recorded as such. Not bothering to turn up to the polling station is very different.

[Claptrap314]

Are you really that ignorant of history? Look up Bleeding Kansas. Not woke enough for you? Not 20th century enough? Look up the statehood votes in Puerto Rico.

Election boycotting is a real thing, and in societies which are at all free, it always has been.

The Soviet Union had required voting. The US does not, thank you very much.

[Juillen 1]

Abstain, or "None of the Above".

No, it's not worse.

I've deliberately withheld voting on several occasions for the simple reason that I could not ethically support any of the options available to me. They were all fatally flawed.

In the previous US election, it was well known why the selections were made for both sides, and both of them ended up proposing fatally flawed candidates that should never have been let within a mile of that role.

When you are that disenchanted with the candidates you have available, not voting isn't always an "I don't care" (though it may be, that's part of stating your opinion, which is what a vote is), it's often "I abstain", which is a deliberate choice.

Yes, people fought for the right to vote, and that's exactly what they got; the right to vote. They DID NOT vote for the requirement to vote, even when you were presented with a false dichotomy.

How on earth you try to turn that into "You don't care about your community", I have no idea, as this person as given up valuable time and effort to provide, for free, some very valuable thinking and code writing time to a worldwide community. Now, he may not give a rat's arse about the community you've chosen to focus your attention on, but that's an entirely different matter. And if you honestly thing that just because you choose a community as your focus, everyone else MUST do the same, then I'd say I detect more than a hint of authoritarianism and tyranny there.

[Cederic]

punching down

I haven't checked his twitter feed but it feels contradictory that he can be both 'punching down' and removed from a project for what he said. Seems to me he crossed some heavily protected people; that's the antithesis of punching down.

The Apache Software Foundation used to be good :(

[Mr D Spenser]

Who ratted him out?

Kind of suspicious when "a private Twitter account with 45 followers" gets flagged like this.

I suspect that it is more like someone with too much time on their hands is searching Twitter for hot button words.

I miss the old Internet where nobody knew or cared that you were a dog.

[Anonymous Coward]

do they really like to police tweets?

like all bodies, large and (some) small, they prefer to sail down, rather than upstream and steer away from the rocks, lest somebody (hear, hear) should accuse them of any current, past, and potential -isms. It makes business sense: less risk / more profit. Unless you're in insurance business, where the risker pays higher premium...

p.s. I wonder when we start mis-quoting:

First they came for Facebook

but I didn't give a flying monkey fuck about Zuck's empire

...

Then they came for the Register...

[jake]

Re: do they really like to police tweets?

"p.s. I wonder when we start mis-quoting:"

I did, in July of 2020. The context is almost the same.

I do not claim to have been the first.

[Jim-234]

1984 was supposed to be a warning.

Instead it is being used as a instruction manual.

[Manolo]

Protect?

"This action was taken, in accordance with the ASF Bylaws, to protect our community of contributors."

And did the contributors ask to be protected thusly*?

Are the contributors so weak-stomached that they need to be protected from some silly tweets only 45 people in the world were reading?

Are the contributors happy that the board regards them as so weak?

Questions, questions...

* Is that a word?

[Charlie Clark]

Re: Protect?

* Is thusly a word?

It is if you want it to be. But as it means in this way there is no need to stick an adverbial suffix on it. I believe there is a subtle difference in its use as a conjunction – "Thus, we see that…" == "therefore" – and an adverb – "We thus see that…" == "subsequently" – though this could simply be convention.

Not sure which icon to go with…

[Cynic_999]

Ironic

So he received death threats for tweeting what was considered "hate speech". Isn't a death threat "hate speech"? Or is it only "hate speech" if it involves certain protected groups? Legal to mock someone because of their ginger hair, but not because of their dark skin. Legal to mock someone because they believe lead can be changed into gold by magic, but not because they believe that water can be turned into wine by magic.

[Manolo]

Re: Ironic

...that water can be turned in to homeopathic cures by magic diluting and shaking.

TFTFY

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Ironic

"Isn't a death threat "hate speech"?"

But, when it's "the woke vs <someone>", it is "good hate". I wish I was joking - but it's the truth.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nazi jokes, rape jokes, not actually funny

I'm going to charitably assume that those of you defending Marko didn't actually see the things that he said. And if you did, and are still defending him, then I probably don't care much for your perspective.

[Manolo]

Re: Nazi jokes, rape jokes, not actually funny

A wiser man than you once said:

“I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

[Claptrap314]

Re: Nazi jokes, rape jokes, not actually funny

That wasn't Voltaire, by the way. His actual quote was much weaker.

But liberals made chest-thumping this misquote an absolute shibboleth in the '80s. My how times change.

[Manolo]

Re: Nazi jokes, rape jokes, not actually funny

Too late to edit my post to "A much wiser woman".

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/06/01/defend-say/

“Don't believe everything you read on the Internet” — Abraham Lincoln.

[Claptrap314]

Re: Nazi jokes, rape jokes, not actually funny

I've not read them, nor to I intend to. I intend to defend free speech, and that specifically means offensive speech. No one has suggested that it was intended to promote violence or robbery, to harass any particular person or group, or any other malum in se. So back off.

[Cynic_999]

Re: Nazi jokes, rape jokes, not actually funny

Unless he was deliberately inciting violence or something just as harmful, it matters not a jot to me what he said. It is perfectly possible to dislike a person and strongly disagree with they said while still defending their right to say it without incurring harsh punishment.

[jake]

Re: Nazi jokes, rape jokes, not actually funny

No, I didn't read whatever it was he wrote. Because I don't want to. Simples.

But you did read it, presumably because you wanted to. So what are you bitching about? Afraid you Great Aunt in Duluth might read it? Perhaps you should let her decide that for herself. She's an adult, right?

And don't give me that bogus bullshit about "think about the children". It's the parent's job to think about their kids, not mine (unless I am specifically invited, in a specific situation).

[A. Coatsworth]

instead we'll invite you, if you so care, to look and form your own opinion.

I care, but I can't go to Twitter to find out what he actually said, so i am left with an incomplete and worrying understanding of the situation:

What I collect from the article is that he said an extremely lame and possibly offensive joke. His punishment: being removed from his own project that he founded a decade ago.

Whitout judging the "joke" itself (I can't) I wonder, is the punishment fitting for the crime?

People really think it is ok to destroy someone's life work for an ill-thought joke? Had he threatened someone or promoted violence against someone or something, I'd understand it... Or perhaps he did. It would be good to know *what* was so henious as to warrant this reaction.

Things like this lend some credibility to the "cancel culture" argument. He crossed some nebulously defined line and got immediately judged and sentenced without right to appeal. Yes, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequence. But I saw once again, is the punishment appropriate?

[LionelB]

Just had a peek at his Twitter. You're overthinking it people. Clearly they got rid of him simply because he's an insufferable jerk.

[jake]

Did you know that from his work on the project? Or did you run across some hearsay and go out of your way to see what the guy was doing in his free time? Doesn't that make you a stalker?

[LionelB]

Nah. He tweets (or did) - broadcast in the public domain, so hardly "stalking". I have small interest in his work, but he certainly doesn't come across as someone I'd feel comfortable working with. Or being associated with in any way. So if a bunch of his business associates felt inclined to shunt him, I get that.

I have no truck with either the woke or anti-woke warriors - they look like grotesque mirror images to me.

But a jerk's a jerk.

[jake]

Agree on a jerk's a jerk. But many people are jerks. Should they all get pulled from whatever project they are on?

And yes, the wws and the a-wws are two sides of the same coin. Neither would exist without the other. They really ought to get a room and get the inevitable over with.

But that's all meaningless to my question. Would you have run across his tweets and "peeked" at them had they not been mentioned here (or wherever the third-party mentioned them)? If you had not "peeked", would they have affected you in any way, shape, or form?

[LionelB]

To answer your last question: no, but what of it?

[BobMarley2000]

His actual Twitter account - https://twitter.com/twarko - has been suspended. Apparently Twitter felt the same way about him.

[Anonymous Coward]

What Twitter thinks of an account holders posts should be irrelevant provide they're not illegal.

But we know how the hive mind in Twitter likes to prevent some things from being spread very widely.

[LionelB]

Why should it be irrelevant? Where is it mandated that Twitter are obliged to provide a platform for all-comers? You may not like it if they choose to take an editorial stance - fine, find another medium more to your taste, or start your own.

[jake]

Exactly. Who cares what the twits at twitter allow or disallow? We'll always have Usenet ...

[Electronics'R'Us]

Jerks

A lot of developers are jerks and quite a few are independent or contract because not a lot of other people want to work directly with them. This phenomenon is hardly limited to tech though.

I can think of a number of people who really are jerks (a particular WONTFIX maintainer comes to mind but he is hardly alone) but I simply ignore them for the most part.

If the project thinks he is insufferable and not worth the hassle then they are free to leave / fork the project.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, the irony, a whole bunch of white guys (and token woman) cancel somone..

..that almost nobody knew about till today because of some silly personal tweets.

These people are obviously too clueless to be familiar with the Streisand Effect.

Or the first Law of Evasion. When presented with a lose/lose situation always do absolutely nothing unless no other alternative. And when forced to choose between the lose / lose alternatives always pick a third one which deflects attention away from the original "problem". Which is usually never actually a "problem" in the first place.

If anyone involved had a clue they would have said "not a technical issue, not our problem" but once they opened the whole pandoras box of "diversity and inclusion" this is exactly the sort of PR debacle which happens. Every time.

The people they are trying to pander to will never ever be satisfied. Whereas the people in the tech field whose respect they need just start shaking their heads thinking - what a bunch of complete idiots. Are they this stupid when making technical decisions too?

Because you really got to start wondering about the competence of these people after self-inflicted reputational wounds like this one.

[Anonymous Coward]

The ASF (and the FSF) are shadows of their former selves

I reckon that everyone who mattered, knew what he was doing, or had the maturity to be there, left a long time ago from both of those.

Would I be mistaken in forming the impression that a new generation of young, university-educated, middle-class Americans have taken over those formerly respectable institutions?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are many many organizations that implicitly or explicitly don't welcome women and blacks so he won't have to remain lonely for long.

[Santa from Exeter]

Full of Shit

I started reading the comments expecting to find a least a few objecting to the lazy use of "Cancel Culture" i.e. I don't want my actions to have any consequences wah wah wah.

I stopped when I got to the fourth mention of "Woke Cullture" Which is just another example of You don't like me being a fucktard so I will call you names.

As one commentard said earlier, I was expecting some debate, not the Fucking Daily Heil! (Oh and it's telling that they have more downvotes that upvotes)

I expect the twats in here will downvote, I don't care, especially as the guy they all claim to be supporting is clearly also a twat from the Twitter shit he spouted.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Full of Shit

> As one commentard said earlier, I was expecting some debate, not the Fucking Daily Heil!

Your own contribution is not exactly conducive to thoughtful debate either.

[j.bourne]

It's elementary

He took a job with a code of conduct - he broke the code of conduct (allegedly). He should have known the possible consequences of that. The argument that he shouldn't be fired for the conduct misses the point. He agreed to those terms already. What he should be doing is arguing that he didn't break the code of conduct.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It's elementary....for volunteer work?

My understanding is that he was the co-creator of an open-source project and a VOLUNTEER. Not a paid employee of the ASF. Even as a paid employee under US law (which would apply here) anything he tweeted in his own time using his own resources and not using ASF resources or media outlets is fully protected by the 1'st Amendment. There is a whole bunch of successful lawsuits (with big payouts) to reinforced that point.

What this means is that in future the ASF consider it their right to police all ASF project volunteers for all political and personal opinions and those opinions which dont conform to a very narrow set of bien piensant opinions are "unacceptable".

As it stands it looks like unless you agree with every opinion published in the New York Times, Guardian, The Nation, The New Statesman etc. you, your project and your volunteer time are unacceptable to the ASF. Because thats all "Speech Codes" are, ideological tests to enforce political conformity.

So thats the ASF dead then. Another victim to Conquests Three Laws of Politics. Law 2 and 3 in this case

[jtaylor]

Re: It's elementary....for volunteer work?

My understanding is that he was the co-creator of an open-source project and a VOLUNTEER. Not a paid employee of the ASF. Even as a paid employee under US law (which would apply here) anything he tweeted in his own time using his own resources and not using ASF resources or media outlets is fully protected by the 1'st Amendment.

Money is irrelevant here. In the US, non-profit orgs and their members are subject to rules and laws just as much as for-profit. The primary difference is that in a for-profit org, the "investors" are those who paid money for ownership stake in the organization. A non-profit org receives financial benefits from government, including tax benefits and often favorable service costs, and possibly direct or indirect financing through grants. Therefore, "the public" is considered to be investors in a non-profit org. Legally. Again, this is peculiar to the US.

As a member of the Board, he is bound by their code of conduct. In fact, as a co-founder, he probably helped create their code of conduct, their culture, and their expectations of Directors.

And there's still the fundamental idea that if you are responsible to an organization, and your duties include representing that organization, then your behavior has consequences for that organization. If an organization is known for its leaders being jackasses, that says a lot.

I don't know what Rodriguez is alleged to have done. I don't know whether he did it. His role and responsibility to the organization is clear, though. It's literally Introduction to Non-Profit Management 101.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It's elementary....for volunteer work?

I would have to guess you have zero real world experience of management and the actual legal requirements and limitations of employers and anyone acting in an equivalent role. Being a 501 (c) (3) makes no difference to free speech rights. Which is what this is.

I see no mention of him being a board member. Just on the team for one of the ASF many umbrella projects. Which run to many dozens.

https://tinkerpop.apache.org/

So just a volunteer.

Even if he was a board member for a purely voluntary technological organization to claim that every person in any way connected with the organization and who volunteers their time will be policed for infractions (while exercising their private free-speech rights) of a purely political politically motivated code of conduct is a free speech issues. There is one line in their code of conduct which in the current climate tells me that if you are a white male and do not conform to this weeks RightThink at any time if anyone make a complaint no matter how unfounded you are automatically guilty.

This is a classic example of where a bunch of clueless people not thinking through what was little more than virtue signalling ended up with a PR debacle that will do irreparable harm to the organization. Because what they are signalling is that anyone who volunteers any time to their projects is essentially signing away their free speech rights. Because at any time a single crank can complain and you will automatically be found guilty. If white and male and not left wing politically. Who after all will be up to 90% plus of the actual real world potential volunteer pool for these projects.

Now if the guy had been tweeting that anyone who used competing software was little more than a sheep molester then the ASF might have had some grounds for complaint. But he wasnt. He was just making dumb jokes. Just like that one.

[jtaylor]

Re: It's elementary....for volunteer work?

Being a 501 (c) (3) makes no difference to free speech rights. Which is what this is.

If by "free speech" you refer to the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which is a contract between the US government and its citizens, I wonder how you think it applies here.

I would have to guess you have zero real world experience of management and the actual legal requirements and limitations of employers and anyone acting in an equivalent role.

Someone who won't even post under their own name challenges my experience in 501(c)3. Okay. Come up with something interesting or topical. Stay away from constitutional law.

[jake]

Re: It's elementary....for volunteer work?

"As a member of the Board"

Again, no. He was not.

"In fact, as a co-founder, he probably helped create their code of conduct, their culture, and their expectations of Directors."

Please do a little research before spouting off. He was co-founder of a little piece of FOSS code that is so small that it doesn't even have it's own Wiki page. He was in no way, shape or form a part of the ASF board, nor did he contribute to the CoC that was forced on all the little projects under the ASF.

[A. Coatsworth]

Re: It's elementary

I find the use of the word allegedly in your post very telling, because it highlights my main gripe with this whole debacle. I am all for people facing consequences for their acts, but justice should 1. Be proportional to the crime, and 2. Follow the due process.

I don't see how any of that is met in this case. The allegedly should imply "innocent until proven guilty"

A summary execution is not justice.

[jtaylor]

Re: It's elementary

justice should 1. Be proportional to the crime, and 2. Follow the due process.

1. This is not a criminal case. 2. "Due process" is defined in the bylaws of the organization. I don't see the process in their Code of Conduct, but there's always a mechanism. If nothing else, the executive body (usually the Board of Directors) would meet and make a decision.

If you have evidence that this is being pursued as a criminal case, that due process is not being followed, or that Rodriguez is at risk of "summary execution," please present it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It's elementary

Think of it as more of an informal very low stakes kangaroo court. But still very much a kangaroo court.

[jake]

Re: It's elementary

So ousting someone from his own project because of an off-colo(u)r joke made outside that project's forum is OK, in your mind?

[A. Coatsworth]

Re: It's elementary

Yes, this is not a criminal case, the language I used probably is not exact. I'm at a loss for the right words to describe the situation.

As Jake helpfully put it in a later comment, this was brought to the court of public opinion, and there the guy's career was summarily executed: After being kicked from his own project and basically labeled a Nazi, who would want to associate with him? He'll become a pariah, and that's that.

As for the due process, where I work the code of conduct has the wording "[...] up to and including termination". This clearly means the boot is not the preferred course of action, nor is it the one applied for a first time offender, NOR is it applied without an investigation from HR. I know it because I've seen it happen (not to me, luckily)

Again, there is no proof anything like this happened. Someone complained and he was thrown by the board without a second thought.

[jake]

Re: It's elementary

"The allegedly should imply "innocent until proven guilty""

I agree. However, in our modern "enlightened" society, an allegation is enough to try, convict and sentence somebody in the court of public opinion. And it's getting worse.

[jake]

Re: It's elementary

"He took a job with a code of conduct"

No, he did not. He co-created a piece of code that eventually found itself under the auspices of the ASF. Later, the ASF decided to force a code of conduct on all such FOSS projects under their wing. He did not agree to it, it was presented as fait accompli to him and everybody else under the auspices of the ASF.

Part of that code says (paraphrasing) "The ASF is allowed to police your every thought and word, even when you are not working on ASF stuff".

Personally, I'd tell the ASF to fuck off. I have, in fact. (I started contributing to NCSA HTTPd before Apache existed, and then continued contributing after Apache took over the codebase. I stopped contributing when they implemented the code of conduct. I refuse to work for thought police.)

[jtaylor]

Re: It's elementary

"He took a job with a code of conduct"

No, he did not. He co-created a piece of code that eventually found itself under the auspices of the ASF. Later, the ASF decided to force a code of conduct on all such FOSS projects under their wing. He did not agree to it, it was presented as fait accompli to him and everybody else under the auspices of the ASF.

Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding. So basically, his project came under the control of ASF and they don't approve of his behavior (outside the project) and therefore removed him? That doesn't look good. I wonder why ASF thought it was necessary.

[jake]

Re: It's elementary

"I wonder why ASF thought it was necessary."

Institutional narcissistic personality disorder would be my guess.

_{It's the weekend ... anyone still following along could probably use a beer. This round's on me.}

[MachDiamond]

There used to be a time

I recall a time when I was very young when sports figures used to travel in a jacket and tie and could be tossed from a team for unseemly behavior. These days hardly a week goes by when one is arrested for a serious crime and if they are ranked high enough, the team will retain them. Other times there are stories about them being drunk/stoned and behaving badly but maybe not so bad that the Gendarmes need to be called.

Board members of large companies are often highly compensated and it's not out of the norm to ask them to refrain from making statements in public that might reflect badly on that organization. Regardless of when and where they are when they make a controversial statement, the chances may be high that due to their position, it will be news and the name of the company will wind up in the headline or the first sentence. Look at all of the grief Boeing is getting for two engine failures when they don't make engines at all. It's the same as blaming Boeing for the bog rolls in the loo. It's the maker of the paper product at fault and/or the airline.

If you are a high profile person and/or work at a high profile company, you likely agreed to limit your controversial public statements and can be held accountable. If you want to sound off unimpeded, work for yourself in a trade where you'll never be noticed.

[jake]

Re: There used to be a time

That nice and all, but what does it have to do with ASF's mistreatment of Mr. Rodriguez?

[bassem.mf]

Weird Decision from the ASF Board!

I find Apache's decision weird. It is normal for an organization to have policies and regulations. But these should only apply to the members while they are representing the organization. Not while they are doing their own thing on Twitter.

[calpoly]

You-are-a-not-a-very-nice-guy-to-work-with

I have spent last 11 years working on one of the top Apache projects. Initially as a contributor in my spare time, later it became my full time job. Ironically, I have not managed to get "committer" status despite my significant contribution to the project. Why? Because, your contribution and devotion to the project itself is not sufficient for THEM. You would not believe but to get this status (like a Honor badge) you MUST be approved by ALL senior members (committers) of a project. You-are-a-not-a-very-nice-guy-to-work-with. I was told. So do not try anymore. Keep doing a great job, but do not ask for promotion anymore.

Literally, this pissed me off. Hey, Linus, do you know that you would not have a chance for any promotion at ASF? You do not care and I envy you.

Cancel culture, Internet policing, communist - style voting/election procedures, what else? Ahhh , those top Apache managers on a BigTech companies payroll.

Btw, in their majority, Apache products are half-baked, full of bugs, lack important features (and NOBODY cares, because its FREE, its Open Source). They are pain in the ass for many companies which try to deploy them. I know what I am talking about - I spent last 5 years working on Hadoop customer support. As a good example, look what is happing now with Hadoop. Dying. Complex, buggy, hard to maintain and slow. RIP.

If ASF would be a private company playing by the market rules - they would be out of business in a couple years. They exists only b/c BigTech allows them and sponsor them.

I am out of this s**t today. Thankfully.