| > > Should NPM have sided with Monsanto because Alice sent them an email that contained a threat? > NPM should side with the first to register until told to do so by a court. Even if they believe doing so will cause more confusion among npm users than the alternative? > NPM just sides with whatever Trademark sends them emails containing threats? What leads you to believe that the threats are the cause for them siding with Kik? They've stated in multiple places they sided with kik because they believe it would reduce confusion, and they present reasons for that belief, and also explicitly stated that the legal issues weren't "pertinent". I've seen no compelling case that they're lying or presenting those reasons in bad faith. You didn't address my point that sending a threat isn't harassment if it's a reasonable threat to send, like threatening a lawsuit to protect your legal right. > Why is Bob informing Azer that he and kik Interactive are dicks? I'm worried this will sound condescending but hopefully you'll appreciate that's not my intention, I'm just not good enough at explaining things to figure out a better way to word this. Bob isn't informing Azer he's a dick. "We don't mean to be a dick, but" is a casual phrasing of "Hi, it's not our intention to cause you pain, but we have to do this thing you're not going to like". Someone who's writing is about to not be very nice, but they're not being disrespectful. By contrast, "you’re actually being a dick. so, fuck you" is unequivocally disrespectful. > About 8 minutes and 10 minutes after Azer asks Bob to stop email him, Bob fires back two more unsolicited emails. I believe that Bob only sent one email to Azer, the other was to NPM support not Azer, but regardless, this would be analogous to, in my allegory, Monsanto asking Alice to stop emailing them, and Alice sending one (or two) more email trying to reason with them. Would Alice's additional emails be spamming and harassment? > Bob is even trolling at this point I've never heard a definition of trolling that didn't involve some level of malice. Is your read that Bob is actively trying to fuck up Azer's open source project? (You're right that Bob implies Kik ultimately ended up squatting the package name, but you really think that's out of spite? Bob is the one saying he doesn't mean to be a dick, not the one saying "fuck you" and summarily unpublishing hundreds of node packages.) > Bob never even responds to Azer's response to Bob's offer of compensation. Seemed obvious to all 3 parties that Azer's offer was not a serious one, Azer's blogpost specifically uses the language "After I refused them". |
Yes. Transferring names causes tons of havoc, as witnessed. Further, no one was confused by this package name, nor are people confused with other package names that may contain Trademarked names with code unrelated to the Trademark.
>What leads you to believe that the threats are the cause for them siding with Kik?
People close to NPM keep making this argument. Others have reported that some of those claims actually turned out to be lies.
>You didn't address my point that sending a threat isn't harassment if it's a reasonable threat to send, like threatening a lawsuit to protect your legal right.
You didn't address many of my points, so I think skipping around is fair game. The problem with your point is that the threat is not reasonable. Bob couldn't even give a concrete Trademark registration that the package violated (because one doesn't exist). You're telling me that a court will have no problem with agents sending threats of "our trademark lawyers are going to be banging on your door and taking down your accounts and stuff like that"?
>Bob isn't informing Azer he's a dick. "We don't mean to be a dick, but" is a casual phrasing of "Hi, it's not our intention to cause you pain, but we have to do this thing you're not going to like".
You're right, he is informing Azer that he and kik Interactive are about to "be a dick about it"[0]. There is just no way to spin this as being compliant with the Code of Conduct. None. It uses an inappropriate word, and the meaning of the phrase sets the user up as someone who violates the Code ("non-friendly", "rude", "unsafe", "unwelcoming", "confusing", "non-respectful", etc).
>I believe that Bob only sent one email to Azer, the other was to NPM support not Azer,
Per NPM policy, Bob was required to CC Azer on emails to them. Azer indicates that he was CC'd on multiple emails from Bob to NPM, so it is highly likely that Azer received the email sent ~8 minutes after Azer asked Bob to stop emailing him (and then Bob sent another email 2 minutes later).
> but regardless, this would be analogous to, in my allegory, Monsanto asking Alice to stop emailing them, and Alice sending one (or two) more email trying to reason with them. Would Alice's additional emails be spamming and harassment?
In your hypothetical? It would appear so.
>I've never heard a definition of trolling that didn't involve some level of malice.
You and Bob have already admitted to malice (here comes, "We don't mean to be a dick about it, but", again). I don't think malice is actually required to be considered trolling though. kik Interactive doesn't even want (and isn't even now using) the package, yet it is trying to acquire it. Why is Bob spamming again (six separate emails in under three hours, three of which received no replies)?
>Seemed obvious to all 3 parties that Azer's offer was not a serious one, Azer's blogpost specifically uses the language "After I refused them".
I've read Azer's blogpost and "after I refused them" undoubtedly refers to his first, entirely reasonable response, "Sorry, I'm building an open source project with that name.". Bob escalated the situation from there.
>"fuck you"
How is this not a casual phrasing?
Bob: troll, spammer, baiter, flamer ("Azer seems to be acting pretty poorly." [hilarious by the way]), dick, harasser
NPM: Sure Bob, have this package. Azer, good luck with your refactor!
[0] http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=being+a+dick