[saghm]

Your post isn't about them being horseshit though; you say that you consider them to be, but pretty the only information in it is entirely unrelated. To me, it basically sounds like you're saying "those people are lying, and I think something different happened but I won't say what it is". Maybe I'm unusual, but that just doesn't convince me at all. I don't know how to decide whether something is believable if no one will tell me what exactly it is that I'm supposed to believe.

I did read that article before seeing your response here. I honestly don't feel like it does much to change my perception of the events that led up to it. My understanding of the claims that you are describing as horseshit are that someone who maintained gem and bundler for years got intentionally pushed out after Ruby Central was threatened to have their funding revoked from Shopify if they didn't take over those packages and remove him. I had never heard of this maintainer before, but I have used bundler and gem before, so my perspective is that even if he was a problem and there was an argument that he should be removed, having one third party threaten another into removing him by forcing the change in ownership of the tools used by the entire community is an extremely myopic way of doing it. Doing an improper job of it that gave him an opening to potentially exploit his continued access is exactly the sort of thing that explains why you shouldn't go about forcing changes like this without adequate transparency and community consensus; instead of improving the security for the community, now a bunch of people who had never heard of the parties involved with this conflict need to be worried about the collateral damage. If you think someone is dangerous, it would make sense to be prepared for this sort of thing after you escalate your conflict with them.

In the absence of any other explanation about what actually happened, the only accounting of the events paints the change in ownership as at best reckless and irresponsible. I'd love to be wrong, but without anything concrete to explain why I shouldn't trust this, I can't differentiate between the reality we're in and one where the accusations are correct and the responses to them are being made in bad faith, and the simplest explanation is that it's because they're the same.

[byroot]

> after Ruby Central was threatened to have their funding revoked from Shopify

So you take the original allegations at face value, even though they only rely on second hand reporting of anonymous testimonies, yet you don't want to consider my post even though the standard of proof is the same.

Got it.

[saghm]

You didn't include the actual context of the sentence you quoted, which is that I'm summarizing my understanding of the allegations. Do you not agree with me that those are what the allegations are, or do you think my ability to summarize them somehow implies that I must agree with them?

The problem with your post is that you're asking people to believe something without telling them what it is. I'd be more than willing to consider an alternate explanation of what happened but so far no one has been willing to share one. Regardless of your reasoning for withholding it (and the reasons of the others who apparently have knowledge of it), no one is going to be convinced of anything of anything by just asking people to trust blindly. At the end of the day, people are not going to believe there's some secret truth that explains everything about how Ruby Central and Shopify were acting if l in good faith; they'll need to be told what actually happened, or they'll quite understandably trust the people who don't seem to be trying to hide something.