[deciplex]

> npm won’t suddenly take your package name.

"...unless we do, in which case we will."

I wonder at the cognitive dissonance that has to be there to type a thing like this when the entire shit show started with you doing exactly what you're saying you won't do.

[ahuth]

I'm not completely up to speed on the situation. Do we know that this happened suddenly?

[deciplex]

Based on the chats here:

https://medium.com/@mproberts/a-discussion-about-the-breakin...

It does seem that the first contact from NPM to Azer was to tell him they were taking his package. There does seem to be a gap there, so maybe there is more to it.

[jsprogrammer]

The author of that post claims those transcripts represent the "complete email thread of [their] exchange", but I also have serious doubts about the accuracy of that claim.

Particularly troubling is the 'first' email from KIK|Bob to NPM:

>OK, so it doesn’t seem to be possible to resolve this amicably. Can you guys help?

>Bob Stratton

>kik Interactive

If this was a cold-email to NPM, we must assume that Bob is relying on NPM to spend time deciphering the chain mail that he had just forwarded to them.

Words like "it" and "this" suggest that their had been prior correspondence between the parties, but maybe Bob just likes to dump chain mails on other parties while using extremely vague pronouns?

[WorldMaker]

Following the Dispute Resolution Policy [1], NPM would have been CCed on the entire chain. This is tl;dr item #2 right at the top:

«2.Email the author, CC [e-mail]»

Given other context in the exchange, I would give Bob the benefit of the doubt that he followed Item #2 here and did CC NPM in this discussion.

Additionally Bob is correct that as soon as the F-bomb was thrown it was a clear intent by Azer not to deal amicably with the situation and also a clear violation of the Code of Conduct [2], which is not mentioned in this article because it is directly invoked/linked in by the Dispute Policy, but is also applicable to the actions taken here.

[1] https://www.npmjs.com/policies/disputes [2] https://www.npmjs.com/policies/conduct

[jsprogrammer]

Bob clearly started the vulgarities by dropping a D-bomb (and labeling himself and KIK one) in the opening clause of his second email.

KIK|Bob never intended to act amicably and, in fact, admitted as such in cold text.

>We don't mean to be a dick about it, but...

NPM seems to have ignored this blatant violation of their dispute policy and didn't even engage in conversation.

[WorldMaker]

That certainly reads to me as an attempt to be colloquially amicable. Certainly it would have put a better foot forward if he had started with something more like "We are trying to do the right thing and...", but minor self-effacing obscenities are something we Americans tend to use in a colloquial, "buddy buddy" way to suggest that we are aware of the complexities of the situation and empathize with the other person's plight and how they must see us. It certainly read amicably to me, but I can also see why it may not read that way to others, especially with out vocal pattern contextual information, and that it may in fact only add to the confusion of the resulting conversation.

(Thinking about it, I wonder if this is something of an l10n/i18n issue... Oh the wonders of global communications and how it can break down.)