Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jaspervdj 3124 days ago
Explanation in this comment: https://github.com/bountysource/core/issues/1147#issuecommen...

  On July 27, we reached out to Bountysource in response to a complaint we
  received from a user. During our investigation and discussions with members of
  your team, we found that your organization does not have a mechanism for
  responding to removal requests from users, which is required by our Terms of
  Service. Specifically, Bountysource does not "respond promptly to complaints,
  removal requests, and 'do not contact' requests from GitHub or GitHub Users."
  Over two months later, you have not made any changes to your platform in
  response to our requests.
  
  Therefore, we have suspended your application until you create a process for
  actively responding to all personal information removal requests, including
  those related to projects and issues. In order for us to remove the
  suspension, we would ask to see two things:
  
  1. Confirmation from you that you have a process in place for responding to
  takedown requests about all areas of your website.
 
  2. Inclusion of a public notice to your users stating how to request the
  removal of information. That notice can be included in your documentation or
  other legal notices.
  
  Once you have that process and public notice in place, we'll be happy to
  review your site and consider lifting the suspension.
Sounds like it's (hopefully) not permanent.
2 comments

For mobile users [1], quote above:

“On July 27, we reached out to Bountysource in response to a complaint we received from a user. During our investigation and discussions with members of your team, we found that your organization does not have a mechanism for responding to removal requests from users, which is required by our Terms of Service. Specifically, Bountysource does not 'respond promptly to complaints, removal requests, and do not contact requests from GitHub or GitHub Users.' Over two months later, you have not made any changes to your platform in response to our requests.

Therefore, we have suspended your application until you create a process for actively responding to all personal information removal requests, including those related to projects and issues. In order for us to remove the suspension, we would ask to see two things:

1. Confirmation from you that you have a process in place for responding to takedown requests about all areas of your website.

2. Inclusion of a public notice to your users stating how to request the removal of information. That notice can be included in your documentation or other legal notices.

Once you have that process and public notice in place, we'll be happy to review your site and consider lifting the suspension.”

[1] Please don’t use CODE-SNIPPET formatting to quote text, it is unreadable on mobile.

> Please don’t use CODE-SNIPPET formatting to quote text, it is unreadable on mobile.

I don't use mobile, can you show us what does it look like? Is there a maximum width that works?

HN doesn't offer a lot of markup and indenting text for monospacing is about the only tool that they offer for code snippets.

It sets a maximum width with scroll, so text is clipped horizontally. That requires you to scroll back and forth for each line.
rotate 90 degrees
So, it looks like if I set my fill-width to 25 columns, I can still use this and make it readable to pocket computers, right?
At the cost of making it hard to read on desktops, yes. Or you could just, you know, use the leading > style and not have to worry about it the more...
You should generally not assume a text is readable because it uses x-wide columns.

At 25 character columns it will also look rather awful on desktop or widescreen monitors.

Borrowing from email etiquette I find using > arrows to be most indicative of quotes, although HN sometimes eats newlines for breakfast.

But if short lines are readable on one screen, surely short lines are also readable on another screen, right? It's not like eyes depend on the width of the screen, just on the width of the line.
Where can I find the formatting syntax for Hacker News? Clearly it's not markdown :P
Using your browser's responsive design tools should be able to display the problem.
Seems like this is just a bug that HN should fix.
As someone who does not want BountySource involved in their open source projects, I applaud GitHub for this move. IMO BountySource is a borderline bad actor. It was a pain in the ass to get them to remove my projects from their platform and then they only "sort of" did.
Since reading comprehension is apparently a challenge:

Accusation

> IMO BountySource is a borderline bad actor.

Elaboration

> It was a pain in the ass to get them to remove my projects from their platform and then they only "sort of" did.

Sir_Cmpwn has no further obligation to elaborate even further on the detail given, though there might be a benefit to explaining what "'sort of' did" means.

Edit: looks like he did here anyway -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15748433

Elaboration is more of a quantitative thing than qualitative, though. It's always possible to elaborate further, and there's no harm in asking to do so. And I found that his further elaboration was helpful:

"I could also clarify that BountySource is opt-out: by default they're accepting bounties for projects that did not agree to having a bounty program."

I originally assumed you had to register your project on BountySource, and they were just making it difficult to de-register something that had already been added.

Making this thing opt-out only, and apparently making opting out difficult, is really bad behavior, and I completely agree with his characterization.

I'm not sure I got all that. Could you elaborate further, please?
Would you care to elaborate on "borderline bad actor"?
I did, in my original comment, immediately following the accusation.
Can you elaborate (via an edit, because probably HN won't let you post new replies now), on why you want bountysource to not be involved with your project at all? The desire to not have them involved is what we thought you meant by "bad actor", and we didn't realise that by "bad actor" you meant that they wouldn't remove you when you asked.
Sure. I didn't want them in my projects for reasons that varied from project to project. Sometimes it was that I did not want money involved in the culture of some of my smaller projects. At other times it was because the overhead of dealing with bounties would be counterproductive to the project, since it was likely to lead to low-value contributions that fulfill a bounty but are not up to the level of quality that the project demands of its contributions. "What do you mean you won't accept this patch? It was paid for by a dozen users!" For one of my projects, we have an internal bounty program which I am more effectively able to exercise a greater degree of control over and make the terms more clear about upfront.

None of this is why a bad actor, it's just why it's a bad fit for my projects (and to be honest, many others). Why they're a "borderline bad actor" is what I said earlier:

>It was a pain in the ass to get them to remove my projects from their platform and then they only "sort of" did.

I could also clarify that BountySource is opt-out: by default they're accepting bounties for projects that did not agree to having a bounty program.

Do you mind linking to it? I tried digging through your comment history to find it and couldn't.
Is this a joke? The third parent of your comment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15747940

To which MadcapJake responded "Would you care to elaborate", and you responded "I did, in my original comment, immediately following the accusation." I assumed that meant you had made some other comment earlier that explains your complaint in more detail. Did you mean by that that you had just edited your original comment?

I'd really like to hear some more detail. I've not heard of BountySource before today, I thought you could go into detail on what you had to do to get your stuff off their site and whatnot.

He said ELABORATE, "to develop or present in detail". Your explanation for them being a "borderline bad actor" is sparse to say the least.
In what ways is BountySource a "bad actor"?