|
|
|
|
|
by chis
3220 days ago
|
|
I'm not an expert, but it seems within the realm of possibility. Despite what hackernews thinks, the forkers have a somewhat reasonable argument, in that Vagg did violate the Code of Conduct (because it is extreme), and the committee voted to ignore it (because he's a valuable contributor). Morality aside, it calls the system into question if someone can violate established rules and get away with it because the judges disagree with the rules. Also, several members of their ruling committee left to make the fork. So it's not just a bunch of randoms, and they might be able to make some meaningful progress on their own. |
|
Vagg seems to have a somewhat reasonable argument as well, in that he cannot correct behavior that has not been noted as problematic by himself or others.
If that's true, even though committee members ended up leaving for the fork, I could see their behavior as extreme enough to drive away people who try to contribute to the fork.
Edit: I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted. Either case seems possible to me given the dearth of objective information. That I'm collecting upvotes while you are getting downvotes is odd, and IMO unwarranted.