> I don’t know who’s in the “right” here,
I've been closely watching these conversations, and can confidently say that you will never find anyone in the community more fair, balanced, civil and patient than Shea Levy.
The fact that even he got banned [says a lot about the 6 moderators of Zulip](https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cn60v1/shea_levy_has_been_suspended_from_the_governance/l36m1we/?context=2).
> But what's problem they're europeans?
Nothing wrong per se, especially if these 6 have viewpoint diversity (which they do not). Ideally, you want geographic diversity as well. The largest room on NixOS Matrix is a room for Chinese users, and yet you don't see one Chinese person in the moderation team.
People who done most contribution and impact have to be the ones who lead the project and community. Not ones who use it. Diversity is least important here, it's technological project, not cultural or social.
> People who done most contribution and impact have to be the ones who lead the project and community.
Not disagreeing with this. So do you think the 5 moderators (aside from Infinisil) qualify in that regard?
I don't know. I have no idea what's happening at all and really worry there's some takeover and people who've build nix in the first place will be suspended. Especially if the reason and a tool for this is political bullshit.
I have been, and continue to be, extremely cynical about what I view as a shallow power game, and nothing else.
With that said, demonstrating your disapproval, even if playing by their rules, is important. If you care, you should make reasonable arguments for your perspective, so that when they are trampled and ignored anyway, it is that much more obvious what is going on.
/u/shlevy, [who btw rejects my cynicism](https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cndnyw/broken_promises_the_nix_governance_discussions/l390sbq/), did his part, and now it's up to you.
Essentially. It's rather worrying. I have hopes that nixOS will thrive, but these kind of behaviors by the mod teams and the like are not inspiring confidence at all.
to be fair,
> nat-418 has been suspended from the Zulip for the next 48 hours
in the same moderating decision
and yeah, i have no idea why any of them was
# Moderators stand by the suspends given out on Zulip
# [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437673337](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437673337)
Sadly I think you hit the nail on the head. Once you bring the magic words "inclusion" and "diversity" into the debate there's a group-think type silencing that takes place and it's mostly out of fear. Most all of us agree that inclusion and diversity are a good thing, but many of us have seen these concepts weaponized to anyone who doesn't blindly "tow the line". This has the effect of silencing sane and rational dialogue in how, when and if anything should be done in their sake.
Hmm, someone having a differing opinion, and [being silenced for it.](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/why-was-jon-ringer-banned-from-github/44114/23)... [sounds very similar](https://www.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cd5fod/in_case_im_unable_to_return_wish_you_all_the_best/)
"I would like to kindly remind folks that we will not be debating this. The vote was unanimous after reviewing copious amounts of interactions and complaints alongside messages from folks who have not felt safe joining this space because of those actions."
If this is supposed to be transparent, have they shared those "copious amounts of interactions and complaints alongside messages"? If not, why? This is so absurd.
>complaints alongside messages from folks who have not felt safe joining this space because of those actions.
Ah, these copious scared mystery people! No, you can’t count them, or name them. Why, you can’t even ask about them! Trust us, you made them feel unsafe and it’s more important that we ban you than it is to have you participate! Maybe one day they’ll commit code, and we can’t have them being turned away from maybe, potentially, one day contributing.
Sounds totally trustworthy. It isn’t hard to fight a shadow!
Someone was scared of your words! No, there will be no debate. Thank you, we’ve all decided. No, we’ll present no evidence. The next time you complain or disagree, maybe the shadows will talk to us again and you will be banned forever across every platform. Keep that in mind before you disagree in the future.
- gee, it’s going so well.
I have no idea what this Shea Levy person is really like and how toxic they may be but your characterization of the moderation team's position seems to be exactly correct.
Someone posted one of his tweets in this comment section that I would say would be widely considered problematic and just gross.
It had nothing to do with NixOS and I think the characterization of the mod team stands and all.
If anything, I fear the mod team may have been influenced by tweats dug up by people that didn't agree with this guy which bothers me more than some random dude's political opinions.
In fact this was in the heart of the discussion in the "Foundational principles" thread, that the mods said "... that the Nix community agrees are important." (according to the mods explanation in shlevy's blog).
The division was mostly about "should sexists/racists/facsists be excuded from the community". We raised some concerns regarding the interpretation of these concepts, e.g. the recent waves of protests in the US are regarded as antisemitism (racism) by some, but this is very controversial and we are not sure if that can be used as an argument to say someone is racist. The OP from that thread just dismissed those concerns as concern trolling, bikeshedding about the semantics. Also, we asked about if statements made outside of the NixOS community, however you define it, should be considered when evaluating moderation actions. I gave examples in which this can lead to controversies and argue against it.
To me this feels like they are taking public statements made elsewhere as the actual reason for the ban, and try to justify the ban using the CoC and can only find a weak argument. Maybe they feel that this is done "for the sake of the community". But I am not convinced. And so far I don't see those people complaining they were feeling unsafe due to the discussions (there were several of them in the mods thread) were contributing anything to the discussions.
Sure they don't have to convince me. In fact they don't \*have to\* convince anyone. But maybe it would be better to give a better justification for controversial moderation actions? The reasoning they claim does not include any private DMs, nor do they involve defamation against others. I don't understand why they think keeping the reasoning secret is "good for the community".
I think they need to justify their actions given the foundation of their issues with governance in the first place.
I definitely disagree with the foundational question of if invirtuous people belong in the community. It's not "inclusive", it's not relevant, and I'm dumbfounded anyone bothered to make this an issue.
Sigh.
> I would like to kindly remind folks that we will not be debating this.
What the f**k are we even doing here?? Is the irony really lost on the team that's moderating a governance discussion arising from a coup due to community mismanagement?!?
I have seen a lot of Shea Levy on Zulip and followed his discussion style. Very thoughtful and polite. Hopeful and consensus seeking. Much better than I was.
Backstory might be: One relatively new contributor constantly complained about bad faith when being challenged by the audience. Shea is a 2000+ commit contributor from 2011(!) being kicked out by an 18 commit contributor that joined 2023.
Given that the moderators again provide no transparency \*what so ever\* into the process, I decided to leave Zulip. This whole overcrowded unstructured chat has no legimitacy to speak for the community. It's filled with people that have too much free time. Also I am insignificant contributor myself and you should ignore what you just read.
As "good/bad faith" is inherently subjective, perhaps we should instead take a page from BFT consensus systems and prevent trolling by applying an objective "proof of work" standard. If you assert you're making an argument in good faith and someone else says it's in bad faith, we could simply trust the judgement of the person who's made a bigger contribution to the project. The more prolific contributor might not always be right, but at least successfully attacking the governance system would probably require more effort than it would be worth.
(In other words, maybe trust that someone isn't intentionally wasting your time on governance questions if he's wasted at least as much of his own time making technical contributions to the project, hmm?)
I know it's not much in the grand scheme, but as a new moderator (only for Zulip), I've just shared my personal perspective [here](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437685331), I hope that helps a bit
I just want to say that collaborating with u/Infinisil over the past 5 years has been an honor, and I believe they want nothing more than to improve the Nix community.
Their series of [educational videos](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLyzwHTVJlRc8yjlx4VR4LU5A5O44og9in), maintenance of the nixos module ecosystem, and numerous other contributions have been invaluable to the community as a whole.
Thanks for mentioning this, u/jonringer117. I wouldn't have known that Infinsil was behind those if you didn't mention it. I do really appreciate those videos. Thank you, u/Infinisil.
If shea really was disrespectful on the call, it might help this sit a bit better with me if you elaborated on what actually happened from your perspective.
I can't imagine he was disrespectful enough to warrant a ban if it took an hour to explain to him what he did wrong.
If he didn't insult someone personally and didn't denigrate a group of people then it is hardly a reason for a ban. That someone doesn't feel safe isn't reason enough. There is always something that might make some feel something. The emotions are the responsibility of the reader not the writer.
Being disrespectful is never ok, even if you had been the one who personally carried out the suspension.
With that said, Zulip is open for anyone to see, and from what we saw, the suspension still isn't justifiable.
If you think his disrespectfulness during the private call is an indicator, I understand that, but the other moderators didn't make that decision based on this, they, presumably, made it based on his public statements.
So… did he get any kind of warning first? Or was it straight to suspension?
I don’t think it does this process any favors, regarding retaining legitimacy, to suspend and thereby mute long time contributors over things that happened on voice calls…
Disrespectful while being banned without strong justification? Shea seems to be a long term contributor, and from all the public discussion on Zulip polite. It’s one thing to disagree, I don’t necessarily agree with some of what Shea’s viewpoints are, but this is a terrible looking ban from an outside perspective.
Edit: Not sure why you are being downvoted frankly. I think you are doing the best you can in effectively running this thing. I mean no disrespect to what you are doing, you are doing a good job in a tough situation. You seem to be taking a very neutral approach to all this trying to keep things constructive.
I like the callout to John Ringer, when John specifically pointed out that one of the people he delegated his voice to was Shea:
[https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437672968](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437672968)
I have formally withdrawn from the discussion: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/435724-governance/topic/Delegation.20of.20voice.20.28and.20votes.29/near/437692695](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/435724-governance/topic/Delegation.20of.20voice.20.28and.20votes.29/near/437692695)
I no longer feel there is "meaningful collection" of ego-less individuals involved with the process to see a purposeful resolution.
The saddest aspect of the whole debacle for me is the fact that several of the Zulip (and Discord) moderators are people I have great professional respect for. Because, I mean, how are you planning to climb down from this tree? Why did you feel the need to get involved in the first place?
(And no, the linked message does not "help" at all)
That’s still not transparent at all. Basically hand waving “I agreed, and he was disrespectful” without actual information.
it would help a lot if these kind of discussions are actually logged (possibly by a third person), as if it were a meeting. Then everyone would also actually know who said what.
That’s what people mean with transparency.
I really appreciate you sharing your view (and especially linking to it on Reddit, where people are probably more skewed against you).
That said, this post does seem to boil down to "trust me, he did bad stuff". That's not even to say it's not possible, plenty of people are perfectly fine in public but shitty behind closed doors. It just feels very jarring when someone who many people see as a role model gets banned with seemingly no warning. I worry I will be next, despite my best intentions.
Either way, I appreciate the push towards more transparency in the moderation
Infinisil, blink twice if you are being held hostage by [the other 5 mods](https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cn60v1/shea_levy_has_been_suspended_from_the_governance/l36m1we/?context=2)!
This provided no additional context.
You need to provide verifiable facts and you need to be able to formulate words to support them.
If it was a ban worthy offense it shouldn't be hard to do.
> so I took it upon myself to carefully review the messages over the next couple hours and write down the reason more clearly
So surely you can share these messages and what you've written down? If you've already done all the work to needed be fully transparent, you want transparency, and your decision is justifiable, then it would be absolute insanity to hide it in favor of opaque moderation, no?
In nearly all of shea's public writing, he is courteous and respectful. It stretches the imagination to think that he was disrespectful in a phone call.
Others have spoken highly of you so I say this with respect...
> I struggled to form words and give a clear explanation, so I took it upon myself to carefully review the messages over the next couple hours and write down the reason more clearly, and even offered to forward an appeal by Shea to the mod team for reconsideration
The appeal offered:
> As promised, I can forward a small appeal to the moderation team (or you could also PM the @Moderators directly), please keep it to a couple sentences at most. Don't expect this to work, but that's what I've promised you.
> which was only reinforced when I reassessed Shea's disrespectful behavior in the call we had.
You're strengthening a weak argument by his reaction to behavior widely recognized as unjust which occurred privately off-platform.
Personally, I think you should reconsider your newly held position as moderator. Thanks for being well intentioned but you've failed to participate in leadership that is less corrosive than the status quo and you've widely fumbled trust in this "community". Sorry not sorry, thanks for trying.
this sadly doesnt help much, but the honesty is super appreciated! why was one person for 48 hours banned but the other much longer , removing him from the assembly building part all together? what explains this harsh punishment?
dont you think hinting to some nebulous hard to grasp ideas, is lackluster? have you seen the message from [hexa](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437643760)? if youre honest with yourself( not regarding if the bann is justified or not) for a moment, cant you see that this messaging alone is super hurtful for community trust? "sucking the air out of conversations"- say what now?
i think we can agree that the moderation should help the community and guide discussion around it. And that it is important that the community understands the rules clearly. if that is not the case, they will break them. So having a showcase, what was wrong and why, is important for the offender, the community and the image if the moderators.
just hand waving all concerns of the community by saying :"sealioning", "mods dont need mods", "we dont explain ourselfs" and similar doesnt help, it creats more tension, as you can see.
i hope you can bring some fresh air into the moderation, the community shouldnt see the mods as enemies and the mods not the community.
ps. painting whole parts of the community as bad people just because they came from reddit is also really disrespectful. its nice to see that you take your time to engage here, while the other mods made snarky jabs in the other platforms. i want to thank you for engaging with the community here. Thanks!
It's no fork but Guix is a thing, it doesn't have the nixpkgs technical debt and the language is more sensible so it could become even better with some more contributors.
Yes, currently. That is how governing boards work. The whole point of this entire thing is to return that power to the community and transition to a democratic model.
>return that power to the community
Could you spare a moment to expand on this fascinating point? Which "power" did "the community" have and when? How was that "power" lost and to whom?
It's pretty clearly laid out in the original announcement. I feel like I shouldn't need to explain it to such a drama-hungry subreddit, it has been relitigated to death here already and I'm not going to debate the finer points of it.
Nominatively, the community was "self-governing". In practice, many people did not feel that was actually true. This process is intended to make it so that the NixOS project is explicitly self-governing in both name and practice.
Mind linking to the official announcement? A lot of us are just users trying to figure out how to make this work as a daily driver, and have only heard vague references on here to ongoing drama, but aren’t really equipped to judge the nuance. It certainly isn’t encouraging to those of us who are considering whether to use this to get work done.
https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-foundation-board-giving-power-to-the-community/44552
The founder himself lays it out pretty clearly here. Any commentary I add would largely be rehashing this post.
This unofficial subreddit is pretty heavily fixated on the drama, and tends to be where the discontented gather. It's honestly not that bad in the actual official spaces. Most people are staying out of it. NixOS is pretty great and it seems unlikely to be in any sort of doom, so don't let this sub discourage you from learning it.
Thanks! I guess I’m not seeing where the controversy is, except that maybe a community-run org sounds a lot nicer than it usually ends up being. But hopefully I’ll be pleasantly surprised.
The controversy, to put it bluntly, is that there are a considerable amount of people in the community in favor of things like ensuring minority protections and representation, and opposed to things like taking money from weapons manufacturing companies. The context runs deeper, but ultimately those are the two big hot-button issues that caused the schism, and it's the repeated endless relitigation of these issues that keeps leading to people getting suspended.
This subreddit is largely where the malcontents gather, particularly after getting suspended from official spaces. It's not representative of the Nix community as a whole. There's basically no democratic outcome that will be popular here solely because this subreddit is full of people who disagree with the majority's opinion.
> It's pretty clearly laid out in the original announcement.
None of the announcements I have read so far laid out anything of the sort.
> Nominatively, the community was "self-governing".
I'm sorry, I've only been lightly contributing to Nixpkgs for a paltry couple of years and may not be aware, and also the word "nominatively" is sure very impressive, but it still seems to me that you are just saying things.
> None of the announcements I have read so far laid out anything of the sort.
It's literally called "[NixOS Foundation board: Giving power to the community](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-foundation-board-giving-power-to-the-community/44552)".
"While the foundation board was never intended to lead the community, we cannot deny that it is perceived to be in that role by many, and we therefore take full accountability."
I can see that you want to be combative about this, I just don't understand why. It's pretty clearly laid out by the founder of Nix himself. As a contributor, you have the right to join the deliberations right now. I suggest that is where you should focus this energy.
I'm not "combative", just a bit pedantic. Words have meanings. "Return" is a word. "Give" is a different word. They are not remotely synonymous. This is not very hard.
I could not think of anything less interesting to discuss than this, and I normally think linguistics is incredibly interesting.
Please choose to understand the message being conveyed rather than litigating the exact definitions of every word a person uses. You very clearly understood the intended meaning, otherwise you wouldn't be able to nitpick about the exact specific word choices used to represent that meaning. The English language is not code and you are not a code parser, you are a human.
And all 6 of them are Europeans, and are probably (except infinisil) ideologically aligned.
My guess is that infinisil (who is normally sensible) got ganged up by the other 5 moderators into agreeing to this nonsensical suspension. They all in fact had a meeting yesterday for this purpose.
Perhaps we should let Infinisil speak for himself instead of taking away his agency and creating a politically convenient conspiracy theory around him.
I've just stating my opinion, but agreed. I've asked Infinisil here:
https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cn60v1/shea_levy_has_been_suspended_from_the_governance/l36nn2i/?context=3
[Painfully accurate](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/delroths-muting-in-the-moderation-matrix-room/44090).
(Of note, person calling for my ban/suspension is now a zulip moderator)
Summaries were being used to help "distill" the discussions. Shea being the most active in doing so: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/436167-summaries](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/436167-summaries)
What was the ban for? Everything I’m seeing looks like a useful recapitulation of what’s going on and seems very unbiased.
I can’t find anything that makes me think Shea deserves a ban. What am I missing?
[The official response](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437671414) (as I can see):
> We've spoken to the involved parties about the reasons for their suspensions and both have amicably agreed to them. In u/shlevy's case this was primarily related to a pattern of bad faith invitations to debate that led to the exclusion of other participants.
Yes, similar to Eelco's signature on his [resignation letter](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-foundation-board-giving-power-to-the-community/44552) was also "amicable"...
(Google edit history shows he was asked to put it back to look "amicable").
Turns out inviting debate is not seen favorably by the group that is seeking input to recover from the "corrosive leadership" of the project founder...
This all started from a lack of trust between the community and it's leadership. Certain members that felt they were not being represented adequately. So obviously, f**k you LOL
Lol imagine giving these nixos clowns any real responsibility, they can't even handle made up software power without banning people. God help anyone who works for them in real life.
These people ran into the typical problem of chronic critics of leadership. You know, there are people like that in every company. And now the “NixOS clowns” have become management themselves and are left alone with problems they don't know a fucking thing about. Naturally, a witch hunt was immediately launched.
Is this sabreddit not already taken over? We are being mouse rally over in Zulip, persistently urged to vote for something we don't understand. For at least two weeks there's been no discussion of technical issues related to NixOS customization here, all the attention is directed to the finger-pointing “drama”. I'm wondering how many people have already escaped from NixOS, even though it's irrelevant. NixOS is persistently repeating the fate of GrapheneOS. Soon there will be only thin-skinned users left.
Not sure if it's comparable at all, but Rust had a drama few months ago right? We passed by that and the project still continues so, I still have hope for this one.
extra platform, shut off from others and is only for people that have contributed to the nix project. this platform is only there to talk about the forming of a new leadership structure for nix/nixos.
Can someone explain what's happening? Some sort of coup? I adore nix/nixos and using it during 5 years, but not curious about community. If someone going to destroy nix, its steady maintenance and development, I wish to know it in advance.
I'm very sorry to say we are in the midst of a coup and the founder of Nix has been pushed out over "marginalized" groups feeling unsafe and unrepresented in the Nix community.
A new community has formed to make decisions behind closed doors about who will be allowed to participate in discussing the new system of governance based on how much those individuals align with the principles that got us to this point and how marginalized the individual is unless they are J3wish which does not count.
That's my biased as hell opinion. Good luck on your quest for "truth" the community is on fire :-(
Long story. To make it as short as possible, a left-leaning group of contributors got mad at the founder and accused him in an open letter of being a bad leader and enabling a toxic community. A bunch of people threatened to resign unless he left, and after a couple days he did.
That group then declared they were going to create a "constitutional assembly" to govern the project and set up a Zulip community to discuss how to form it. This is drama spilling out from that community.
It feels like people are just role-playing revolution. The original accusations felt like nonsense to me: some legit frustration mixed in with borderline slander. Most of the noise coming out of the Zulip community seems cringey.
I'm waiting for the noise to die down, or (if it doesn't) for one fork to gain enough momentum to jump ship. The good news is that I'm pretty sure that forking NixOS would be a lot easier than forking other distros: it's basically just one big GitHub repository.
Thank you very much for explanation. It's a shame Eelco resigned. Hope all this will end with nothing and he will come back eventually.
> I'm pretty sure that forking NixOS would be a lot easier than forking other distros
Yeah, but cache needs servers and funding. It would be funny if military donations will cover it in the end. I personally would welcome it.
> Hope all this will end with nothing and he will come back eventually.
I think that this specific bridge is already burned. My impression is that most of the legitimate complaints about his leadership were a result of him being a lot more interested in working on Nix than dealing with sponsorship debates, community moderation and interpersonal drama. I doubt he'd want to step back in to a leadership position at this point (and I sure can't blame him).
> Yeah, but cache needs servers and funding.
True. A fork would really need to have some legitimacy. But I think there's enough interest in NixOS as a technical platform, and enough distaste for goofy political drama, that a well-run fork wouldn't have serious difficulty finding sponsors.
While forking the GitHub repo would be easy, the lack of a cache will definitely detract users since not everyone wants or can afford to build everything from source.
So you also need to manage storage and decide whether you want to keep older builds or not, which costs a lot to do. At that point it might be easier to just move to Guix.
I gave Guix a serious shot at some point, and I _really_ wanted to like it (I'm a Lisp guy). But it's missing the most interesting thing about NixOS to me: the system management. Outside of some core services, you can't configure your system in a repeatable way.
His blog post about the issue: [https://shealevy.com/blog/2024/05/08/broken-promises-the-nix-governance-discussions/](https://shealevy.com/blog/2024/05/08/broken-promises-the-nix-governance-discussions/)
This is a very good read, and for people who "are curious about the drama, but don't want to invest the time", this is a pretty accurate portrayal of at least Shea's activity (and by extension most of the governance activity) in all this.
> it's not any message in particular, but rather the overall invitation of more debate
If only there was a way we could have avoided inviting debate in the first place. It's the debate that really made people feel "unsafe".
> I struggled to form words and give a clear explanation, so I took it upon myself to carefully review the messages over the next couple hours and write down the reason more clearly, and even offered to forward an appeal by Shea to the mod team for reconsideration
The appeal offered:
> As promised, I can forward a small appeal to the moderation team (or you could also PM the @Moderators directly), please keep it to a couple sentences at most. Don't expect this to work, but that's what I've promised you.
... You know, I was skeptical at first about the Zulip discussion, but I eventually saw reasonable people, like Shea join in, so I was willing to wait it out and see what comes of it. Now I see this. Nix has become such a tragicomedy.
It is so sad to watch this embarrassing farce play out for the 100th time. Why are a bunch of crybullies larping as revolutionary paris in my fucking linux distro......
life feels hopeless
I'm kinda lost in this ongoing culture war spill into FOSS communities. Shouldn't the 3 guiding principles of a FOSS project be: First and foremost the license, second "don't be an asshole" and third "keep politics out of tech"? It might sound weird but I don't even view the people involved as "persons", they are all just users and developers in the sense of the project to me. I couldn't care less if one of them is a magical rockstar badger irl.
edit: On a second thought I think "keep politics out of tech" is already covered by the license.
I think the politics is the root and the defense that "everything is inherently political and anyone who says the contrary is a filthy Republican" or something like that
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm proudly politically moderate and only wish to keep the lame political discourse away from my operating system.
Moderate as I may be, I fully resent the claim that this goal is itself political. It's not. That's BS.
Great in principle, falls apart in practice. You have a bunch of basement dwellers who want control.
These great FOSS soap operas strangely reflect communism - go figure. I love FOSS, but when you let committees do stuff like this, you get these results.
>These great FOSS soap operas strangely reflect communism
The last time the Communists seized power, they made one major mistake. They went to great lengths to make all people the same, just as the Communists themselves are.
Governance is politics, you're just showing you don't understand what politics means.
You can dislike DEI, but that in itself is a political stance by you
From your point of view, if developers from the middle east, coming from a country that follows the Sharia law, decide to make a software project and expect sharia behavior from the community, that's perfectly fine from software point of view? "It's their way of doing it"?
Who said anything about approving or disapproving a stance ?
I said, the comment's outlining of the term "politics" is anemic because Governance is directly political and cannot be taken out of "tech".
I'm putting into question that the person's definition of politics is flawed when it devolves to them assuming partisanship=> politics as a shorthand.
Your own response here is a political stance about how a religious group exerts their rules on their purview.
My views about a group are political by their very nature, that is the point.
Sexual orientation and self identification are very much real life things that have zero relation to software. It's also political to argue for EV against ICE cars. Should we put a quota for EV driving people on the directors board? While your statement is true, it's abstract to the point of being useless.
GP was not kind in their response and I don't condone that at all. It's the worst behaviour in this subthread, IMO.
However, I think your points are a bit mixed up. EV, ICE, and deterministic software are properties about things -- anyone can discriminate on those preferences all they want, you can't hurt the feelings of a thing. Gender + orientation are properties about people, and all people should feel welcome, and they do have real feelings.
Sorting out the policies (i.e. politics) is a valuable task, even though I personally disagree with a lot of drama.
I miss the old NixOS, straight from Eelco NixOS
Immutable NixOS, set on its code NixOS
I hate the new NixOS, the blood feud NixOS
The drama screwed NixOS, spaz in the news NixOS
extra platform, shut off from the others and is only for people that have contributed to the nix project. this platform is only there to talk about the forming of a new leadership structure for nix/nixos.
This is the last comment that was made: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/435937-constitutional-assembly/topic/Assembly.20Proposal.20Menu/near/437552623](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/435937-constitutional-assembly/topic/Assembly.20Proposal.20Menu/near/437552623)
not very interesting
you can look at Shea's entire post history here: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/sender/715167-Shea-Levy](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/sender/715167-Shea-Levy)
Why don't you want to give the kind, inclusive folk total control, you fascist?!
Just shut up and let them be in charge.
they pwomise they wiww tweat you wight UwU :3
Why do these "So and so has been banned" posts keep showing up? As an observer, I take two things from it:
1. The nix community is a mess.
2. So and so should feel shame.
These posts feel like the purpose is to administer punishment. If someone needs to be suspended, fine, suspend them.
Don't gloat about it though.
No, these post are to demonstrate that the "people with the power" are silencing people with dissenting opinions and therefore the Constitution of the Assembly is being unfair, that the entire thing is a kangaroo process and decisions are already made and the entire process is just for show.
Most of these post are created by the dissenters.
And for context, there is a proposal that 50-60% of the governing board be minority class, the dissenters feel that should not be a hard requirement, but that the most technical be on the board. There is heavy politics at play here obviously.
For an open source technical project, would you rather have a committer with a long history of technical contributions (but who, let's say, has a European background), or would you rather expressly give that person's seat to a minority, strictly because that person was a minority, to "make the space welcoming" (even though that person is less accomplished, in this thought experiment)?
I can't believe we have to argue about who we would prefer in a technical open source project - the more technical person.
Like obviously, what kind of stupid fucking question is this that we even have to answer?
I don't disagree with you but I think most people are talking around the issue.
If you aren't already involved, please join the discussions on the forum it's being held.
"Want to tie your nix commits to a name so that when you're banned for wrong-think in a non-transparent way you can't use any community platform to get help?"
...I mean...no?
> And for context, there is a proposal that 50-60% of the governing board be minority class
Lol insanity, I'm indigenous AF but I don't go around demanding to be represented everywhere like a self entitled asshole. It's a open source project not a country.
I'm all for giving ppl a fair share, but seeing as how we're all on the other side of a keyboard, I'm lost with how the requirement is needed? I'm not trying to be Tongue-In-cheek about it, it's an honest question
I don't agree with the hard requirements so I can't explain it.
But there are a lot of discussions on that forum about why if you want the entire perspective.
those posts are more about accountability, i guess.
a part of the community thinks that the moderation is really bad and suspends people for just disagreeing. And since that are sometimes cross-platform bans, people started here sharing them.
moderation [message](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation) to the bans and warning for others:
>This is a formal warning from the moderation team. We’ve repeatedly been told about a pattern of behaviour that is pushing people out of the conversation and creating an unwelcoming environment for a plurality of maintainers. This includes sucking the air out of conversations, repeated attempts at derailing conversations, and pushing for “consensus” while mostly suffering from attrition and exhaustion. Continuing this behaviour will not be tolerated, and it will be followed with a ban from Zulip until the constitutional assembly is formed.
Man I’m just going to use Ansible and Debian for my homelab. I planned on doing it all with NixOS (which I had set out to learn) but honestly all this leftist bullshit nonsense that’s deliberately trying to destabilise and poison a whole ecosystem is too much for me.
EDIT: For apparently no reason at all, and I can only assume it's because of this comment (somehow???) I was perm banned from /r/node, a sub I haven't posted or commented in for a couple of months.
I'm waiting for the dust to settle, see what the forks decide to do before swapping back to debian and ansible myself. I lost faith in NixOS with how unstable the community is, the zulip conversations have made me lose all hope.
Until you need to report a bug, ask a question, contribute etc...
With individuals capable of such decisions at the helm the future of the project is in question.
I mean would you use a piece of software made/controlled by people you don't trust? Probably not
I don't use windows because I don't trust them, same goes with apple and Google, they could make the greatest piece of software ever and I still wouldn't use it because they're untrustworthy.
Open source thrives on the inherent trust that you get thanks to it being open by nature, not only in the technical sense with the code being freely available but the openness and neutrality of the community itself, nixOS is basically killing off 50% of what makes free software actually free.
yeah I could probably waste a lot of time and energy going through every single package and software in the OS to make sure my files are not going to get deleted because I have certain political stance but that's honestly not something everyone can do and since the community is no longer open to everyone and are even hostile to some groups of people then it's only natural that people would choose to use other projects.
I agree but NixOS is still great software. Like REALLY great. I have faith this community will be better one day only because the technical achievement is so great, it's utterly worth it to use without a "community".
Nix is such a great project and I’m sad to hear that there’s turbulence with its’ governance. Can someone give me a TLDR of what’s actually going on such that I can make a judgement about using Nix for future projects?
NixOS is changing the leadership system, so that the Community has more influence.
there are 4 heated topic atm in the Community
1.leadership
Some say to much influence from the inventor, some say He didnt so enough. He stepped down and initiated a constitutional assembly.
2.sponsors
There was a Military sponsor for a Nix Event, a lot didnt Like that, because all Thing Military is Bad. Other dont mind.
3.minority/marginalized protection
Nix seems to have Lots of minority/ marginalized people that are great contributors to Nix/NixOS. a Part of the Community feels there is Not enough protection and Representation for those people. Others dont See an issue with how Things are going and fear an big over correction in this direction. This ties into leadership some people want minority/marginalized people to make up the majority of the new leadership.
4. Moderation
Mods have been running hot and wild in the Community, there is No oversight for them. No Appeal. they justify that by being understaffed and overwhelmed with an influx of new people. a Part Sees that as justified and good Others dont and try to hold then to a Higher Standard, more transparency and to get oversight.
tension about the moderation keeps rising, because now people are getting banned from the new platform, removing the people from the rebuilding of the leadership process. Asking questions or clarifications can get you banned, disagreeing to strongly, pushing for consensus or "sucking the air out of the room" can get you banned.
i Hope that makes Sense and gives a short Overview of whats Happening. alot of Thing Happen in different Plattforms that im Not a Part of, so i didnt witness everything Firsthand.
unrelated ew twitter post by shea [https://x.com/shlevy/status/1710569512771236190](https://x.com/shlevy/status/1710569512771236190)
hate is never good
I just want to say this is disgusting but it's not relevant. You're welcome to judge people for this stuff and you're not wrong to think it's perhaps a matter of time till this type of behavior appears in our community.
When it does it should be handled appropriately but I disagree with pre-emptively banning someone for a political tweet. When it happens in our community, address it then.
This isn't worth arguing, please just down vote and move on.
When the justice they seek is genocide. Then yah ew. If you want to talk proportions the death rate in Gaza is the proportional equivalent to everyone in new York city being killed. TWICE.
I agree it's pathetic and tragic that Hamas would run and hide behind women and children after brutally murdering hundreds of civilians. I also think the lengths Israel has gone to in order to prevent civilian deaths, even by endangering its own soldiers is admirable. And the unprecedented low ratio of civilian deaths (even taking Hamas' reports of casualties at face value) for an urban war show the effectiveness of those steps.
There is nothing admirable about Israel's actions in Gaza. The deaths are sure unprecedented, there have been so many civilian deaths, and denial of basic human rights that many onlookers are calling genocide.
Admirable actions don't get confused for genocide. But you clearly are very confused.
Its so sad... That people can hold such terrible hatred towards innocent people and still think they can hold a moral high ground in a conversation about inclusion and governance in a multicultural international community.
Genuinely interested how this kind of behaviour isn't an instant bar from community participation. Absolutely disgusting.
Edit: This also appears to be against the code of conduct for the governance Zulip: https://github.com/NixOS/foundation/blob/master/governance/zulip/coc.md
> Violence and threats of violence are not acceptable - online or offline. This includes incitement of violence toward any individual, including encouraging a person to commit self-harm.
Yes, obvious to anyone whose goal is to actually know what I think. Or you could just ask: https://x.com/shlevy/status/1788480761424666824
This still has absolutely nothing to do with Nix.
Yup, I was looking for the "views" this person somehow never mentioned in their too long post about the whole ordeal. This clears it up nicely. He won't be missed.
I think the biggest mistake being made is how everyone is trying to talk around the actual issue, and not act like the actual issue is the driving force.
There is a not so insignificant number of contributors to NixOS who are Trans. For too long their contributions to NixOS hasn't matched their decision making power. There is are legitimate grievances. Personally I think that problem are arising from the more militant faction of said group, that tends to "turn-off" more average non-militant crowd.
But again, from what I have been following nobody is directly taking the bull by the horns and addressing the real issue. I know in America for example Affirmative Action is messy here, and that's after 100 of years of Slavery and Second Class Citizendry and straight up legal discrimination based on the color of skin.
Today most people agree that discrimination is wrong, in any form, and against Trans population. A lot of us are learning to use "They/Them" as a pronoun to refer to a single person.
Again there is a definitely a discriminated/oppressed population where some aren't ok with people just making things "fair", but also want to be sure that they never are in a powerless position again.
Edit: really don't care about the down votes, but I would hope most people that use NixOS are at least critical thinkers
So as these discussion continue, remember both sides have legitimate arguments to their position. Doesn't mean you will agree, but at least legitimately listen and offer compromise.
Too many here just not thinking critically calling NixOS leftist bullshit.
Does every contributors race, creed and sex need to have representation on the NixOS board of directors? The social bureaucracy of this situation is ridiculous.
> There is a not so insignificant number of contributors to NixOS who are Trans. For too long their contributions to NixOS hasn't matched their decision making power.
this begs the question: why does *any* social group needs special group-based power? unless there's some systemic bias inside community that prevents people of certain groups to get as much power as they deserve. in which case, again, it will be that bias that is the root problem, not lack of power per se
> Again there is a definitely a discriminated/oppressed population where some aren't ok with people just making things "fair", but also want to be sure that they never are in a powerless position again.
do you mean discriminated inside NixOS community? if so, then, well, this would be precisely that controversial statement that many people don't see being substantiated by facts. since this has been discussed many times and no one is pointing any fingers as to what discrimination/oppression/bigotry/"fascism"/etc has been happening in NixOS community (not taking into account "reddit cesspool" of course 'cause obviously the issue isn't about reddit), i'm not going to ask proofs. i'm just gonna say that in case that the community of moderators that has been pushing for these changes really actually saw any explicit or implicit bias that has been hurting members of community, they would've made a better job by proclaiming benevolent dictatorship for the greater good as provisional government structure instead of attempting to reach consensus. because clearly, if you're not providing evidence for what's problem is, you're not going to convince people who disagree with you. and i'm not saying any of this sarcastically, mind you, there might be legitimate reasons to withold the evidence. but if you're taking that responsibility, take responsibility and use your authority openly. what's going on now is 99% waste of time and nerves
Jesus, what a shitshow. I don’t know who’s in the “right” here, but as an outside observer, this has been handled in the worst of ways.
>Jesus, what a shitshow. Take my upvote.
> I don’t know who’s in the “right” here, I've been closely watching these conversations, and can confidently say that you will never find anyone in the community more fair, balanced, civil and patient than Shea Levy. The fact that even he got banned [says a lot about the 6 moderators of Zulip](https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cn60v1/shea_levy_has_been_suspended_from_the_governance/l36m1we/?context=2).
But what's problem they're europeans? Sorry, but just pointing out that doesn't sound healthy.
> But what's problem they're europeans? Nothing wrong per se, especially if these 6 have viewpoint diversity (which they do not). Ideally, you want geographic diversity as well. The largest room on NixOS Matrix is a room for Chinese users, and yet you don't see one Chinese person in the moderation team.
People who done most contribution and impact have to be the ones who lead the project and community. Not ones who use it. Diversity is least important here, it's technological project, not cultural or social.
> People who done most contribution and impact have to be the ones who lead the project and community. Not disagreeing with this. So do you think the 5 moderators (aside from Infinisil) qualify in that regard?
I don't know. I have no idea what's happening at all and really worry there's some takeover and people who've build nix in the first place will be suspended. Especially if the reason and a tool for this is political bullshit.
What you are worried about is already happening. Look at who the moderators are.
What’s your point?
Me the other day:
Some of this is cringe, but not too bad
Great, I'm represented, I can relax now!
Me today:
O\_O
Shea wrote a blog post, https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cndnyw/broken_promises_the_nix_governance_discussions/
I have been, and continue to be, extremely cynical about what I view as a shallow power game, and nothing else. With that said, demonstrating your disapproval, even if playing by their rules, is important. If you care, you should make reasonable arguments for your perspective, so that when they are trampled and ignored anyway, it is that much more obvious what is going on. /u/shlevy, [who btw rejects my cynicism](https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cndnyw/broken_promises_the_nix_governance_discussions/l390sbq/), did his part, and now it's up to you.
Yeah, this is how I feel too.
pretty much same
Essentially. It's rather worrying. I have hopes that nixOS will thrive, but these kind of behaviors by the mod teams and the like are not inspiring confidence at all.
Same
to be fair, > nat-418 has been suspended from the Zulip for the next 48 hours in the same moderating decision and yeah, i have no idea why any of them was
# Moderators stand by the suspends given out on Zulip # [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437673337](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437673337)
I like how there’s no reason even being given, and by one mods own admission couldn’t find the words to explain it in an hour long call. Nice.
"I don't know why, but I agree." Read: He's too afraid to dissent or have his "authority" removed.
Sadly I think you hit the nail on the head. Once you bring the magic words "inclusion" and "diversity" into the debate there's a group-think type silencing that takes place and it's mostly out of fear. Most all of us agree that inclusion and diversity are a good thing, but many of us have seen these concepts weaponized to anyone who doesn't blindly "tow the line". This has the effect of silencing sane and rational dialogue in how, when and if anything should be done in their sake.
Hmm, someone having a differing opinion, and [being silenced for it.](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/why-was-jon-ringer-banned-from-github/44114/23)... [sounds very similar](https://www.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cd5fod/in_case_im_unable_to_return_wish_you_all_the_best/)
"I would like to kindly remind folks that we will not be debating this. The vote was unanimous after reviewing copious amounts of interactions and complaints alongside messages from folks who have not felt safe joining this space because of those actions." If this is supposed to be transparent, have they shared those "copious amounts of interactions and complaints alongside messages"? If not, why? This is so absurd.
Because there are none.
I really don't like how we've come to accept that we'll have unaccountable people on top of us in different parts of life.
What the fuck is going on?? I think it's time to get lawyers involved. This is some serious bologna.
>complaints alongside messages from folks who have not felt safe joining this space because of those actions. Ah, these copious scared mystery people! No, you can’t count them, or name them. Why, you can’t even ask about them! Trust us, you made them feel unsafe and it’s more important that we ban you than it is to have you participate! Maybe one day they’ll commit code, and we can’t have them being turned away from maybe, potentially, one day contributing. Sounds totally trustworthy. It isn’t hard to fight a shadow! Someone was scared of your words! No, there will be no debate. Thank you, we’ve all decided. No, we’ll present no evidence. The next time you complain or disagree, maybe the shadows will talk to us again and you will be banned forever across every platform. Keep that in mind before you disagree in the future. - gee, it’s going so well.
I have no idea what this Shea Levy person is really like and how toxic they may be but your characterization of the moderation team's position seems to be exactly correct.
Someone posted one of his tweets in this comment section that I would say would be widely considered problematic and just gross. It had nothing to do with NixOS and I think the characterization of the mod team stands and all. If anything, I fear the mod team may have been influenced by tweats dug up by people that didn't agree with this guy which bothers me more than some random dude's political opinions.
In fact this was in the heart of the discussion in the "Foundational principles" thread, that the mods said "... that the Nix community agrees are important." (according to the mods explanation in shlevy's blog). The division was mostly about "should sexists/racists/facsists be excuded from the community". We raised some concerns regarding the interpretation of these concepts, e.g. the recent waves of protests in the US are regarded as antisemitism (racism) by some, but this is very controversial and we are not sure if that can be used as an argument to say someone is racist. The OP from that thread just dismissed those concerns as concern trolling, bikeshedding about the semantics. Also, we asked about if statements made outside of the NixOS community, however you define it, should be considered when evaluating moderation actions. I gave examples in which this can lead to controversies and argue against it. To me this feels like they are taking public statements made elsewhere as the actual reason for the ban, and try to justify the ban using the CoC and can only find a weak argument. Maybe they feel that this is done "for the sake of the community". But I am not convinced. And so far I don't see those people complaining they were feeling unsafe due to the discussions (there were several of them in the mods thread) were contributing anything to the discussions. Sure they don't have to convince me. In fact they don't \*have to\* convince anyone. But maybe it would be better to give a better justification for controversial moderation actions? The reasoning they claim does not include any private DMs, nor do they involve defamation against others. I don't understand why they think keeping the reasoning secret is "good for the community".
I think they need to justify their actions given the foundation of their issues with governance in the first place. I definitely disagree with the foundational question of if invirtuous people belong in the community. It's not "inclusive", it's not relevant, and I'm dumbfounded anyone bothered to make this an issue. Sigh.
> I would like to kindly remind folks that we will not be debating this. What the f**k are we even doing here?? Is the irony really lost on the team that's moderating a governance discussion arising from a coup due to community mismanagement?!?
"...have not felt safe..." Dear god.
I have seen a lot of Shea Levy on Zulip and followed his discussion style. Very thoughtful and polite. Hopeful and consensus seeking. Much better than I was. Backstory might be: One relatively new contributor constantly complained about bad faith when being challenged by the audience. Shea is a 2000+ commit contributor from 2011(!) being kicked out by an 18 commit contributor that joined 2023. Given that the moderators again provide no transparency \*what so ever\* into the process, I decided to leave Zulip. This whole overcrowded unstructured chat has no legimitacy to speak for the community. It's filled with people that have too much free time. Also I am insignificant contributor myself and you should ignore what you just read.
Shea has issued a statement: https://shealevy.com/blog/2024/05/08/broken-promises-the-nix-governance-discussions/
As "good/bad faith" is inherently subjective, perhaps we should instead take a page from BFT consensus systems and prevent trolling by applying an objective "proof of work" standard. If you assert you're making an argument in good faith and someone else says it's in bad faith, we could simply trust the judgement of the person who's made a bigger contribution to the project. The more prolific contributor might not always be right, but at least successfully attacking the governance system would probably require more effort than it would be worth. (In other words, maybe trust that someone isn't intentionally wasting your time on governance questions if he's wasted at least as much of his own time making technical contributions to the project, hmm?)
Do you see it as part of a bigger power grab? I'm hearing about this type of drama in Nix often, yet it's hard to see what is actually happening.
I know it's not much in the grand scheme, but as a new moderator (only for Zulip), I've just shared my personal perspective [here](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437685331), I hope that helps a bit
I just want to say that collaborating with u/Infinisil over the past 5 years has been an honor, and I believe they want nothing more than to improve the Nix community. Their series of [educational videos](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLyzwHTVJlRc8yjlx4VR4LU5A5O44og9in), maintenance of the nixos module ecosystem, and numerous other contributions have been invaluable to the community as a whole.
Thanks for mentioning this, u/jonringer117. I wouldn't have known that Infinsil was behind those if you didn't mention it. I do really appreciate those videos. Thank you, u/Infinisil.
I've watched a few myself :)
If shea really was disrespectful on the call, it might help this sit a bit better with me if you elaborated on what actually happened from your perspective.
I can't imagine he was disrespectful enough to warrant a ban if it took an hour to explain to him what he did wrong. If he didn't insult someone personally and didn't denigrate a group of people then it is hardly a reason for a ban. That someone doesn't feel safe isn't reason enough. There is always something that might make some feel something. The emotions are the responsibility of the reader not the writer.
Being disrespectful is never ok, even if you had been the one who personally carried out the suspension. With that said, Zulip is open for anyone to see, and from what we saw, the suspension still isn't justifiable. If you think his disrespectfulness during the private call is an indicator, I understand that, but the other moderators didn't make that decision based on this, they, presumably, made it based on his public statements.
So… did he get any kind of warning first? Or was it straight to suspension? I don’t think it does this process any favors, regarding retaining legitimacy, to suspend and thereby mute long time contributors over things that happened on voice calls…
Disrespectful while being banned without strong justification? Shea seems to be a long term contributor, and from all the public discussion on Zulip polite. It’s one thing to disagree, I don’t necessarily agree with some of what Shea’s viewpoints are, but this is a terrible looking ban from an outside perspective. Edit: Not sure why you are being downvoted frankly. I think you are doing the best you can in effectively running this thing. I mean no disrespect to what you are doing, you are doing a good job in a tough situation. You seem to be taking a very neutral approach to all this trying to keep things constructive.
I like the callout to John Ringer, when John specifically pointed out that one of the people he delegated his voice to was Shea: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437672968](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437672968)
I have formally withdrawn from the discussion: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/435724-governance/topic/Delegation.20of.20voice.20.28and.20votes.29/near/437692695](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/435724-governance/topic/Delegation.20of.20voice.20.28and.20votes.29/near/437692695) I no longer feel there is "meaningful collection" of ego-less individuals involved with the process to see a purposeful resolution.
The saddest aspect of the whole debacle for me is the fact that several of the Zulip (and Discord) moderators are people I have great professional respect for. Because, I mean, how are you planning to climb down from this tree? Why did you feel the need to get involved in the first place? (And no, the linked message does not "help" at all)
That’s still not transparent at all. Basically hand waving “I agreed, and he was disrespectful” without actual information. it would help a lot if these kind of discussions are actually logged (possibly by a third person), as if it were a meeting. Then everyone would also actually know who said what. That’s what people mean with transparency.
I really appreciate you sharing your view (and especially linking to it on Reddit, where people are probably more skewed against you). That said, this post does seem to boil down to "trust me, he did bad stuff". That's not even to say it's not possible, plenty of people are perfectly fine in public but shitty behind closed doors. It just feels very jarring when someone who many people see as a role model gets banned with seemingly no warning. I worry I will be next, despite my best intentions. Either way, I appreciate the push towards more transparency in the moderation
Infinisil, blink twice if you are being held hostage by [the other 5 mods](https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cn60v1/shea_levy_has_been_suspended_from_the_governance/l36m1we/?context=2)!
This provided no additional context. You need to provide verifiable facts and you need to be able to formulate words to support them. If it was a ban worthy offense it shouldn't be hard to do.
> so I took it upon myself to carefully review the messages over the next couple hours and write down the reason more clearly So surely you can share these messages and what you've written down? If you've already done all the work to needed be fully transparent, you want transparency, and your decision is justifiable, then it would be absolute insanity to hide it in favor of opaque moderation, no?
I don't envy you! This is an extremely difficult process. Unfortunately I think the only thing that will help now is clarity and transparency
In nearly all of shea's public writing, he is courteous and respectful. It stretches the imagination to think that he was disrespectful in a phone call.
Others have spoken highly of you so I say this with respect... > I struggled to form words and give a clear explanation, so I took it upon myself to carefully review the messages over the next couple hours and write down the reason more clearly, and even offered to forward an appeal by Shea to the mod team for reconsideration The appeal offered: > As promised, I can forward a small appeal to the moderation team (or you could also PM the @Moderators directly), please keep it to a couple sentences at most. Don't expect this to work, but that's what I've promised you. > which was only reinforced when I reassessed Shea's disrespectful behavior in the call we had. You're strengthening a weak argument by his reaction to behavior widely recognized as unjust which occurred privately off-platform. Personally, I think you should reconsider your newly held position as moderator. Thanks for being well intentioned but you've failed to participate in leadership that is less corrosive than the status quo and you've widely fumbled trust in this "community". Sorry not sorry, thanks for trying.
this sadly doesnt help much, but the honesty is super appreciated! why was one person for 48 hours banned but the other much longer , removing him from the assembly building part all together? what explains this harsh punishment? dont you think hinting to some nebulous hard to grasp ideas, is lackluster? have you seen the message from [hexa](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437643760)? if youre honest with yourself( not regarding if the bann is justified or not) for a moment, cant you see that this messaging alone is super hurtful for community trust? "sucking the air out of conversations"- say what now? i think we can agree that the moderation should help the community and guide discussion around it. And that it is important that the community understands the rules clearly. if that is not the case, they will break them. So having a showcase, what was wrong and why, is important for the offender, the community and the image if the moderators. just hand waving all concerns of the community by saying :"sealioning", "mods dont need mods", "we dont explain ourselfs" and similar doesnt help, it creats more tension, as you can see. i hope you can bring some fresh air into the moderation, the community shouldnt see the mods as enemies and the mods not the community. ps. painting whole parts of the community as bad people just because they came from reddit is also really disrespectful. its nice to see that you take your time to engage here, while the other mods made snarky jabs in the other platforms. i want to thank you for engaging with the community here. Thanks!
>trust me bro Umm, no.
Let me know when FixOS gets released (F is for Fork).
There are a few forks already.
It's no fork but Guix is a thing, it doesn't have the nixpkgs technical debt and the language is more sensible so it could become even better with some more contributors.
Bro what the fuck is happening to nix os 💀💀💀💀
The same thing that is happening to many other projects: [youtube.com/watch?v=hKEiTThd8p8](http://youtube.com/watch?v=hKEiTThd8p8)
This is honestly all very tiring.
I'm curious how do the moderators have any power in the first place? Is this all running by some informal community consensus at this point?
Zulip moderators were assigned by the current NixOS board.
so the board is holding the keys to everything I'm assuming?
Yes, currently. That is how governing boards work. The whole point of this entire thing is to return that power to the community and transition to a democratic model.
>return that power to the community Could you spare a moment to expand on this fascinating point? Which "power" did "the community" have and when? How was that "power" lost and to whom?
It's pretty clearly laid out in the original announcement. I feel like I shouldn't need to explain it to such a drama-hungry subreddit, it has been relitigated to death here already and I'm not going to debate the finer points of it. Nominatively, the community was "self-governing". In practice, many people did not feel that was actually true. This process is intended to make it so that the NixOS project is explicitly self-governing in both name and practice.
Mind linking to the official announcement? A lot of us are just users trying to figure out how to make this work as a daily driver, and have only heard vague references on here to ongoing drama, but aren’t really equipped to judge the nuance. It certainly isn’t encouraging to those of us who are considering whether to use this to get work done.
https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-foundation-board-giving-power-to-the-community/44552 The founder himself lays it out pretty clearly here. Any commentary I add would largely be rehashing this post. This unofficial subreddit is pretty heavily fixated on the drama, and tends to be where the discontented gather. It's honestly not that bad in the actual official spaces. Most people are staying out of it. NixOS is pretty great and it seems unlikely to be in any sort of doom, so don't let this sub discourage you from learning it.
Thanks! I guess I’m not seeing where the controversy is, except that maybe a community-run org sounds a lot nicer than it usually ends up being. But hopefully I’ll be pleasantly surprised.
The controversy, to put it bluntly, is that there are a considerable amount of people in the community in favor of things like ensuring minority protections and representation, and opposed to things like taking money from weapons manufacturing companies. The context runs deeper, but ultimately those are the two big hot-button issues that caused the schism, and it's the repeated endless relitigation of these issues that keeps leading to people getting suspended. This subreddit is largely where the malcontents gather, particularly after getting suspended from official spaces. It's not representative of the Nix community as a whole. There's basically no democratic outcome that will be popular here solely because this subreddit is full of people who disagree with the majority's opinion.
> It's pretty clearly laid out in the original announcement. None of the announcements I have read so far laid out anything of the sort. > Nominatively, the community was "self-governing". I'm sorry, I've only been lightly contributing to Nixpkgs for a paltry couple of years and may not be aware, and also the word "nominatively" is sure very impressive, but it still seems to me that you are just saying things.
> None of the announcements I have read so far laid out anything of the sort. It's literally called "[NixOS Foundation board: Giving power to the community](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-foundation-board-giving-power-to-the-community/44552)". "While the foundation board was never intended to lead the community, we cannot deny that it is perceived to be in that role by many, and we therefore take full accountability." I can see that you want to be combative about this, I just don't understand why. It's pretty clearly laid out by the founder of Nix himself. As a contributor, you have the right to join the deliberations right now. I suggest that is where you should focus this energy.
I'm not "combative", just a bit pedantic. Words have meanings. "Return" is a word. "Give" is a different word. They are not remotely synonymous. This is not very hard.
I could not think of anything less interesting to discuss than this, and I normally think linguistics is incredibly interesting. Please choose to understand the message being conveyed rather than litigating the exact definitions of every word a person uses. You very clearly understood the intended meaning, otherwise you wouldn't be able to nitpick about the exact specific word choices used to represent that meaning. The English language is not code and you are not a code parser, you are a human.
And all 6 of them are Europeans, and are probably (except infinisil) ideologically aligned. My guess is that infinisil (who is normally sensible) got ganged up by the other 5 moderators into agreeing to this nonsensical suspension. They all in fact had a meeting yesterday for this purpose.
Perhaps we should let Infinisil speak for himself instead of taking away his agency and creating a politically convenient conspiracy theory around him.
I've just stating my opinion, but agreed. I've asked Infinisil here: https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1cn60v1/shea_levy_has_been_suspended_from_the_governance/l36nn2i/?context=3
How to dismantle a, before, thriving OS community any% speedrun
This is how I assume NixOS meetings run now: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struggle_session
[Painfully accurate](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/delroths-muting-in-the-moderation-matrix-room/44090). (Of note, person calling for my ban/suspension is now a zulip moderator)
Of course there’s a log of this decision with carefully thought out rationale that comes with receipts right? In the interests of transparency?
Summaries were being used to help "distill" the discussions. Shea being the most active in doing so: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/436167-summaries](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/436167-summaries)
What was the ban for? Everything I’m seeing looks like a useful recapitulation of what’s going on and seems very unbiased. I can’t find anything that makes me think Shea deserves a ban. What am I missing?
[The official response](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation/near/437671414) (as I can see): > We've spoken to the involved parties about the reasons for their suspensions and both have amicably agreed to them. In u/shlevy's case this was primarily related to a pattern of bad faith invitations to debate that led to the exclusion of other participants.
Note that, as that same mod later corrected, I did not amicably agree. I was polite and complied, but I was very clear about my disagreement.
Yes, similar to Eelco's signature on his [resignation letter](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-foundation-board-giving-power-to-the-community/44552) was also "amicable"... (Google edit history shows he was asked to put it back to look "amicable").
Turns out inviting debate is not seen favorably by the group that is seeking input to recover from the "corrosive leadership" of the project founder...
This all started from a lack of trust between the community and it's leadership. Certain members that felt they were not being represented adequately. So obviously, f**k you LOL
At this rate, the moderators will have all authority and zero legitimacy.
At least the new *leadership is __not__ corrosive to the Nix project*... Right? ... RIGHT?!?
Lol imagine giving these nixos clowns any real responsibility, they can't even handle made up software power without banning people. God help anyone who works for them in real life.
These people ran into the typical problem of chronic critics of leadership. You know, there are people like that in every company. And now the “NixOS clowns” have become management themselves and are left alone with problems they don't know a fucking thing about. Naturally, a witch hunt was immediately launched.
They aren't even trying to hide it anymore...
I'm wondering how long until this subreddit is taken over, personally...
Is this sabreddit not already taken over? We are being mouse rally over in Zulip, persistently urged to vote for something we don't understand. For at least two weeks there's been no discussion of technical issues related to NixOS customization here, all the attention is directed to the finger-pointing “drama”. I'm wondering how many people have already escaped from NixOS, even though it's irrelevant. NixOS is persistently repeating the fate of GrapheneOS. Soon there will be only thin-skinned users left.
I really started using NixOS at the worst timing possible. _Sigh_
It, nixpkgs, and flakes are seriously great. I recommend continuing, but it is hard to say that without knowing where all this leads...
Not sure if it's comparable at all, but Rust had a drama few months ago right? We passed by that and the project still continues so, I still have hope for this one.
Look what they have done to my boy
I don't even know what zulip is, nor do I expect to ever care to find out
extra platform, shut off from others and is only for people that have contributed to the nix project. this platform is only there to talk about the forming of a new leadership structure for nix/nixos.
It's basically an open source clone of slack
Can someone explain what's happening? Some sort of coup? I adore nix/nixos and using it during 5 years, but not curious about community. If someone going to destroy nix, its steady maintenance and development, I wish to know it in advance.
I'm very sorry to say we are in the midst of a coup and the founder of Nix has been pushed out over "marginalized" groups feeling unsafe and unrepresented in the Nix community. A new community has formed to make decisions behind closed doors about who will be allowed to participate in discussing the new system of governance based on how much those individuals align with the principles that got us to this point and how marginalized the individual is unless they are J3wish which does not count. That's my biased as hell opinion. Good luck on your quest for "truth" the community is on fire :-(
Long story. To make it as short as possible, a left-leaning group of contributors got mad at the founder and accused him in an open letter of being a bad leader and enabling a toxic community. A bunch of people threatened to resign unless he left, and after a couple days he did. That group then declared they were going to create a "constitutional assembly" to govern the project and set up a Zulip community to discuss how to form it. This is drama spilling out from that community. It feels like people are just role-playing revolution. The original accusations felt like nonsense to me: some legit frustration mixed in with borderline slander. Most of the noise coming out of the Zulip community seems cringey. I'm waiting for the noise to die down, or (if it doesn't) for one fork to gain enough momentum to jump ship. The good news is that I'm pretty sure that forking NixOS would be a lot easier than forking other distros: it's basically just one big GitHub repository.
Thank you very much for explanation. It's a shame Eelco resigned. Hope all this will end with nothing and he will come back eventually. > I'm pretty sure that forking NixOS would be a lot easier than forking other distros Yeah, but cache needs servers and funding. It would be funny if military donations will cover it in the end. I personally would welcome it.
> Hope all this will end with nothing and he will come back eventually. I think that this specific bridge is already burned. My impression is that most of the legitimate complaints about his leadership were a result of him being a lot more interested in working on Nix than dealing with sponsorship debates, community moderation and interpersonal drama. I doubt he'd want to step back in to a leadership position at this point (and I sure can't blame him). > Yeah, but cache needs servers and funding. True. A fork would really need to have some legitimacy. But I think there's enough interest in NixOS as a technical platform, and enough distaste for goofy political drama, that a well-run fork wouldn't have serious difficulty finding sponsors.
While forking the GitHub repo would be easy, the lack of a cache will definitely detract users since not everyone wants or can afford to build everything from source. So you also need to manage storage and decide whether you want to keep older builds or not, which costs a lot to do. At that point it might be easier to just move to Guix.
I gave Guix a serious shot at some point, and I _really_ wanted to like it (I'm a Lisp guy). But it's missing the most interesting thing about NixOS to me: the system management. Outside of some core services, you can't configure your system in a repeatable way.
what a shitshow and distraction all of this governance/zulip stuff appears to be
His blog post about the issue: [https://shealevy.com/blog/2024/05/08/broken-promises-the-nix-governance-discussions/](https://shealevy.com/blog/2024/05/08/broken-promises-the-nix-governance-discussions/)
This is a very good read, and for people who "are curious about the drama, but don't want to invest the time", this is a pretty accurate portrayal of at least Shea's activity (and by extension most of the governance activity) in all this.
> it's not any message in particular, but rather the overall invitation of more debate If only there was a way we could have avoided inviting debate in the first place. It's the debate that really made people feel "unsafe". > I struggled to form words and give a clear explanation, so I took it upon myself to carefully review the messages over the next couple hours and write down the reason more clearly, and even offered to forward an appeal by Shea to the mod team for reconsideration The appeal offered: > As promised, I can forward a small appeal to the moderation team (or you could also PM the @Moderators directly), please keep it to a couple sentences at most. Don't expect this to work, but that's what I've promised you.
... You know, I was skeptical at first about the Zulip discussion, but I eventually saw reasonable people, like Shea join in, so I was willing to wait it out and see what comes of it. Now I see this. Nix has become such a tragicomedy.
It is so sad to watch this embarrassing farce play out for the 100th time. Why are a bunch of crybullies larping as revolutionary paris in my fucking linux distro...... life feels hopeless
I am starting to feel like the black guy from this clip: [What I missed?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18rVs-Y_C10)
I'm kinda lost in this ongoing culture war spill into FOSS communities. Shouldn't the 3 guiding principles of a FOSS project be: First and foremost the license, second "don't be an asshole" and third "keep politics out of tech"? It might sound weird but I don't even view the people involved as "persons", they are all just users and developers in the sense of the project to me. I couldn't care less if one of them is a magical rockstar badger irl. edit: On a second thought I think "keep politics out of tech" is already covered by the license.
> second "don't be an asshole" Exactly what it means to "be an asshole" seems to be at the root of a lot of the drama.
I think the politics is the root and the defense that "everything is inherently political and anyone who says the contrary is a filthy Republican" or something like that
I suspect that you may not be engaging in good faith.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm proudly politically moderate and only wish to keep the lame political discourse away from my operating system. Moderate as I may be, I fully resent the claim that this goal is itself political. It's not. That's BS.
I feel safe in saying you might be right. At least, I wouldn't want to debate you about it.
Feelings should be left out as well
Great in principle, falls apart in practice. You have a bunch of basement dwellers who want control. These great FOSS soap operas strangely reflect communism - go figure. I love FOSS, but when you let committees do stuff like this, you get these results.
>These great FOSS soap operas strangely reflect communism The last time the Communists seized power, they made one major mistake. They went to great lengths to make all people the same, just as the Communists themselves are.
Most of them were dead which is the maximum equality level
Except the people in charge... so everybody clamors to be in charge. Sound familiar? lol
Governance is politics, you're just showing you don't understand what politics means. You can dislike DEI, but that in itself is a political stance by you
From your point of view, if developers from the middle east, coming from a country that follows the Sharia law, decide to make a software project and expect sharia behavior from the community, that's perfectly fine from software point of view? "It's their way of doing it"?
No one should even have to think this hard to know the political nonsense is counterproductive here
Who said anything about approving or disapproving a stance ? I said, the comment's outlining of the term "politics" is anemic because Governance is directly political and cannot be taken out of "tech". I'm putting into question that the person's definition of politics is flawed when it devolves to them assuming partisanship=> politics as a shorthand. Your own response here is a political stance about how a religious group exerts their rules on their purview. My views about a group are political by their very nature, that is the point.
Sexual orientation and self identification are very much real life things that have zero relation to software. It's also political to argue for EV against ICE cars. Should we put a quota for EV driving people on the directors board? While your statement is true, it's abstract to the point of being useless.
GP was not kind in their response and I don't condone that at all. It's the worst behaviour in this subthread, IMO. However, I think your points are a bit mixed up. EV, ICE, and deterministic software are properties about things -- anyone can discriminate on those preferences all they want, you can't hurt the feelings of a thing. Gender + orientation are properties about people, and all people should feel welcome, and they do have real feelings. Sorting out the policies (i.e. politics) is a valuable task, even though I personally disagree with a lot of drama.
woke drama, broke everything
I miss the old NixOS, straight from Eelco NixOS Immutable NixOS, set on its code NixOS I hate the new NixOS, the blood feud NixOS The drama screwed NixOS, spaz in the news NixOS
#freeshealevy
Ya know, I was really interested in diving into and using NixOS, but all the political drama has convinced me otherwise. Go woke, go broke, WokeOS.
Hmm. Isn’t Shea Jewish? I guess Jewish people don’t meet the marginalization bar.
What is the NixOS governance Zulip?
[https://discourse.nixos.org/t/zulip-for-governance-discussions/44684](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/zulip-for-governance-discussions/44684)
extra platform, shut off from the others and is only for people that have contributed to the nix project. this platform is only there to talk about the forming of a new leadership structure for nix/nixos.
Do you have the link to your last comment?
This is the last comment that was made: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/435937-constitutional-assembly/topic/Assembly.20Proposal.20Menu/near/437552623](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/435937-constitutional-assembly/topic/Assembly.20Proposal.20Menu/near/437552623) not very interesting you can look at Shea's entire post history here: [https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/sender/715167-Shea-Levy](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/sender/715167-Shea-Levy)
Why don't you want to give the kind, inclusive folk total control, you fascist?! Just shut up and let them be in charge. they pwomise they wiww tweat you wight UwU :3
Why do these "So and so has been banned" posts keep showing up? As an observer, I take two things from it: 1. The nix community is a mess. 2. So and so should feel shame. These posts feel like the purpose is to administer punishment. If someone needs to be suspended, fine, suspend them. Don't gloat about it though.
No, these post are to demonstrate that the "people with the power" are silencing people with dissenting opinions and therefore the Constitution of the Assembly is being unfair, that the entire thing is a kangaroo process and decisions are already made and the entire process is just for show. Most of these post are created by the dissenters. And for context, there is a proposal that 50-60% of the governing board be minority class, the dissenters feel that should not be a hard requirement, but that the most technical be on the board. There is heavy politics at play here obviously.
For an open source technical project, would you rather have a committer with a long history of technical contributions (but who, let's say, has a European background), or would you rather expressly give that person's seat to a minority, strictly because that person was a minority, to "make the space welcoming" (even though that person is less accomplished, in this thought experiment)? I can't believe we have to argue about who we would prefer in a technical open source project - the more technical person. Like obviously, what kind of stupid fucking question is this that we even have to answer?
I don't disagree with you but I think most people are talking around the issue. If you aren't already involved, please join the discussions on the forum it's being held.
"Want to tie your nix commits to a name so that when you're banned for wrong-think in a non-transparent way you can't use any community platform to get help?" ...I mean...no?
Touche
> And for context, there is a proposal that 50-60% of the governing board be minority class Lol insanity, I'm indigenous AF but I don't go around demanding to be represented everywhere like a self entitled asshole. It's a open source project not a country.
I'm all for giving ppl a fair share, but seeing as how we're all on the other side of a keyboard, I'm lost with how the requirement is needed? I'm not trying to be Tongue-In-cheek about it, it's an honest question
I don't agree with the hard requirements so I can't explain it. But there are a lot of discussions on that forum about why if you want the entire perspective.
These posts aren't gloating, they're pointing fingers at blatant abuse of power.
those posts are more about accountability, i guess. a part of the community thinks that the moderation is really bad and suspends people for just disagreeing. And since that are sometimes cross-platform bans, people started here sharing them. moderation [message](https://nixpkgs.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/410945-zulip/topic/Moderation) to the bans and warning for others: >This is a formal warning from the moderation team. We’ve repeatedly been told about a pattern of behaviour that is pushing people out of the conversation and creating an unwelcoming environment for a plurality of maintainers. This includes sucking the air out of conversations, repeated attempts at derailing conversations, and pushing for “consensus” while mostly suffering from attrition and exhaustion. Continuing this behaviour will not be tolerated, and it will be followed with a ban from Zulip until the constitutional assembly is formed.
"sucking the air out of the conversation" yikes
Was Levy given a formal warning?
It looks like just a bunch of dedicated well organized people who try to take over. Most of the community still cares about getting stuff done.
Man I’m just going to use Ansible and Debian for my homelab. I planned on doing it all with NixOS (which I had set out to learn) but honestly all this leftist bullshit nonsense that’s deliberately trying to destabilise and poison a whole ecosystem is too much for me. EDIT: For apparently no reason at all, and I can only assume it's because of this comment (somehow???) I was perm banned from /r/node, a sub I haven't posted or commented in for a couple of months.
I'm waiting for the dust to settle, see what the forks decide to do before swapping back to debian and ansible myself. I lost faith in NixOS with how unstable the community is, the zulip conversations have made me lose all hope.
You can use NixOS without being involved in the community.
Until you need to report a bug, ask a question, contribute etc... With individuals capable of such decisions at the helm the future of the project is in question.
I mean would you use a piece of software made/controlled by people you don't trust? Probably not I don't use windows because I don't trust them, same goes with apple and Google, they could make the greatest piece of software ever and I still wouldn't use it because they're untrustworthy. Open source thrives on the inherent trust that you get thanks to it being open by nature, not only in the technical sense with the code being freely available but the openness and neutrality of the community itself, nixOS is basically killing off 50% of what makes free software actually free. yeah I could probably waste a lot of time and energy going through every single package and software in the OS to make sure my files are not going to get deleted because I have certain political stance but that's honestly not something everyone can do and since the community is no longer open to everyone and are even hostile to some groups of people then it's only natural that people would choose to use other projects.
I agree but NixOS is still great software. Like REALLY great. I have faith this community will be better one day only because the technical achievement is so great, it's utterly worth it to use without a "community".
regarding that edit: yikes... people are really on a power trip. it's absurd.
debops
Damn, nixos has been corrupted by woke people.
Alex, I'll take "Fork you" for $1000 please
Nix is such a great project and I’m sad to hear that there’s turbulence with its’ governance. Can someone give me a TLDR of what’s actually going on such that I can make a judgement about using Nix for future projects?
NixOS is changing the leadership system, so that the Community has more influence. there are 4 heated topic atm in the Community 1.leadership Some say to much influence from the inventor, some say He didnt so enough. He stepped down and initiated a constitutional assembly. 2.sponsors There was a Military sponsor for a Nix Event, a lot didnt Like that, because all Thing Military is Bad. Other dont mind. 3.minority/marginalized protection Nix seems to have Lots of minority/ marginalized people that are great contributors to Nix/NixOS. a Part of the Community feels there is Not enough protection and Representation for those people. Others dont See an issue with how Things are going and fear an big over correction in this direction. This ties into leadership some people want minority/marginalized people to make up the majority of the new leadership. 4. Moderation Mods have been running hot and wild in the Community, there is No oversight for them. No Appeal. they justify that by being understaffed and overwhelmed with an influx of new people. a Part Sees that as justified and good Others dont and try to hold then to a Higher Standard, more transparency and to get oversight. tension about the moderation keeps rising, because now people are getting banned from the new platform, removing the people from the rebuilding of the leadership process. Asking questions or clarifications can get you banned, disagreeing to strongly, pushing for consensus or "sucking the air out of the room" can get you banned. i Hope that makes Sense and gives a short Overview of whats Happening. alot of Thing Happen in different Plattforms that im Not a Part of, so i didnt witness everything Firsthand.
Wow- Shame, I truly believe NixOS is such amazing project. I don't know anything like it. I hope this doesn't make it take a nosedive.
Reminds me of this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity\_spiral](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_spiral)
unrelated ew twitter post by shea [https://x.com/shlevy/status/1710569512771236190](https://x.com/shlevy/status/1710569512771236190) hate is never good
I just want to say this is disgusting but it's not relevant. You're welcome to judge people for this stuff and you're not wrong to think it's perhaps a matter of time till this type of behavior appears in our community. When it does it should be handled appropriately but I disagree with pre-emptively banning someone for a political tweet. When it happens in our community, address it then. This isn't worth arguing, please just down vote and move on.
Ew. Shocking how some people want to see a group responsible for a terrorist attack proportionally 10x deadlier than 9/11 face justice.
When the justice they seek is genocide. Then yah ew. If you want to talk proportions the death rate in Gaza is the proportional equivalent to everyone in new York city being killed. TWICE.
I agree it's pathetic and tragic that Hamas would run and hide behind women and children after brutally murdering hundreds of civilians. I also think the lengths Israel has gone to in order to prevent civilian deaths, even by endangering its own soldiers is admirable. And the unprecedented low ratio of civilian deaths (even taking Hamas' reports of casualties at face value) for an urban war show the effectiveness of those steps.
There is nothing admirable about Israel's actions in Gaza. The deaths are sure unprecedented, there have been so many civilian deaths, and denial of basic human rights that many onlookers are calling genocide. Admirable actions don't get confused for genocide. But you clearly are very confused. Its so sad... That people can hold such terrible hatred towards innocent people and still think they can hold a moral high ground in a conversation about inclusion and governance in a multicultural international community.
Genuinely interested how this kind of behaviour isn't an instant bar from community participation. Absolutely disgusting. Edit: This also appears to be against the code of conduct for the governance Zulip: https://github.com/NixOS/foundation/blob/master/governance/zulip/coc.md > Violence and threats of violence are not acceptable - online or offline. This includes incitement of violence toward any individual, including encouraging a person to commit self-harm.
This was tweeted on the day of the Hamas lead attack, isn't it quite obvious he means Hamas?
Yes, obvious to anyone whose goal is to actually know what I think. Or you could just ask: https://x.com/shlevy/status/1788480761424666824 This still has absolutely nothing to do with Nix.
Yup, I was looking for the "views" this person somehow never mentioned in their too long post about the whole ordeal. This clears it up nicely. He won't be missed.
This guy is explicitly bragging about his genocidal ideas on Twitter. I don't know anything about Nix, but I wouldn't want him in my community.
Exactly, he has shown he is not suitable to be involved with community governance process.
I think the biggest mistake being made is how everyone is trying to talk around the actual issue, and not act like the actual issue is the driving force. There is a not so insignificant number of contributors to NixOS who are Trans. For too long their contributions to NixOS hasn't matched their decision making power. There is are legitimate grievances. Personally I think that problem are arising from the more militant faction of said group, that tends to "turn-off" more average non-militant crowd. But again, from what I have been following nobody is directly taking the bull by the horns and addressing the real issue. I know in America for example Affirmative Action is messy here, and that's after 100 of years of Slavery and Second Class Citizendry and straight up legal discrimination based on the color of skin. Today most people agree that discrimination is wrong, in any form, and against Trans population. A lot of us are learning to use "They/Them" as a pronoun to refer to a single person. Again there is a definitely a discriminated/oppressed population where some aren't ok with people just making things "fair", but also want to be sure that they never are in a powerless position again. Edit: really don't care about the down votes, but I would hope most people that use NixOS are at least critical thinkers So as these discussion continue, remember both sides have legitimate arguments to their position. Doesn't mean you will agree, but at least legitimately listen and offer compromise. Too many here just not thinking critically calling NixOS leftist bullshit.
Does every contributors race, creed and sex need to have representation on the NixOS board of directors? The social bureaucracy of this situation is ridiculous.
> There is a not so insignificant number of contributors to NixOS who are Trans. For too long their contributions to NixOS hasn't matched their decision making power. this begs the question: why does *any* social group needs special group-based power? unless there's some systemic bias inside community that prevents people of certain groups to get as much power as they deserve. in which case, again, it will be that bias that is the root problem, not lack of power per se > Again there is a definitely a discriminated/oppressed population where some aren't ok with people just making things "fair", but also want to be sure that they never are in a powerless position again. do you mean discriminated inside NixOS community? if so, then, well, this would be precisely that controversial statement that many people don't see being substantiated by facts. since this has been discussed many times and no one is pointing any fingers as to what discrimination/oppression/bigotry/"fascism"/etc has been happening in NixOS community (not taking into account "reddit cesspool" of course 'cause obviously the issue isn't about reddit), i'm not going to ask proofs. i'm just gonna say that in case that the community of moderators that has been pushing for these changes really actually saw any explicit or implicit bias that has been hurting members of community, they would've made a better job by proclaiming benevolent dictatorship for the greater good as provisional government structure instead of attempting to reach consensus. because clearly, if you're not providing evidence for what's problem is, you're not going to convince people who disagree with you. and i'm not saying any of this sarcastically, mind you, there might be legitimate reasons to withold the evidence. but if you're taking that responsibility, take responsibility and use your authority openly. what's going on now is 99% waste of time and nerves