Comment by Pfhreak

4 years ago

Which part?

The part where people are saying they've become aware of several independent, substantiated accusations against Pretty?

The part where they state that sexual assault is unacceptable?

The part where they demand that Pretty stop this behavior, and that communities put stronger code of conducts in place to specifically call out preying on/sexually assaulting members of that community as unacceptable?

Refusing to associate with Pretty, who they believe is an sexual abuser?

Which part of that is 'a bit like a public lynching'? I want you to be specific, because waving your hand loosely at a document and being like, "Well I dunno, but this seems like an execution designed to drive fear into a community" is not only wildly inappropriate but also rhetorically hollow.

6 comments

Pfhreak

ipaddr 4 years ago

"We will not use or promote any software artifacts that are maintained by Mr. Pretty"

This part seems over the top. You go down this road and you end up in some foss hell. Later you find out someone who abused someone checked in code in linux. You can't use windows or a mac because of jobs and gates and you are back on a c64 until you realize what a bad person Jack was and you end up on OS/2.

I guess those who signed want to use an unmaintained version?

I get that people want to do something. Maybe conferences are not the best avenue for the community to meet safely. Providing gender safe housing would go a long way to having a more successful conference if successful means less rapes.

Pfhreak 4 years ago
Edit: Would you characterize that part as "a bit like a public lynching"? Because I definitely wouldn't, even if I disagreed with it or felt it was too much.
---
I think you are very uncharitably reading that comment. There's a difference between, "This person checked some code into a repo" and "this person is the maintainer of a project".
And I think that it's reasonable for people to hold the stance of, "I don't want to run this person's code because I believe they are a serial abuser" and to clearly state why. If other repos see that, maybe they decide to take on that stance, maybe they don't.
They encourage others to consider doing the same, but the don't demand them.
- ipaddr 4 years ago
  
  If you are not going to fork and maintain the repos yourself encoraging others not to use open source is a weird group control method that doesn't feel right. Remember the code is open and apolitical.
  Even thought I disagree with the group who signed the document I will still use whatever they maintain if it makes sense for my project.
  
  1 reply →

tester756 4 years ago

>Which part of that is 'a bit like a public lynching'?

We further resolve that:

    We will not support the efforts of any party in the Scala community that provides a platform to Mr. Pretty. That includes, but is not limited to, boycotting events the party organizes and refusing to buy any product or service the party offers.
    We will not attend any conference or user group meeting organized or attended by Mr. Pretty.
    We will not attend any conference or user group meeting that does not have a code of conduct that is both specific (it must not allow predatory sexual advances in professional spaces) and actionable (it must provide a safe and accessible reporting mechanism for people who have been targeted).
    We will not use or promote any software artifacts that are maintained by Mr. Pretty.

I'd rather avoid believing anything within Scala community until its proven.

tryonenow 4 years ago

Look, both accounts read like naive women who accepted favors from a mentor-like figure and did not say "no" to advances. The other accuser starts her letter by admitting that she and Pretty were in an "on and off" long distance relationship. I think a significant component of the discomfort that these women feel is a manifestation of a sort of social indoctrination, wherein young women are led to believe that historically normal and mutually beneficial relationships are somehow dehumanizing because of a power dynamic. There is also an underestimation of the amount of clout and positive attention that accusers receive from communities for coming forward, and vicious, public condemnation of anyone who dares to question the stories or claimed harm to the alleged victims.

Humans are biologically predisposed to trade sexual access for favors. I believe the harm that many victims claim to have experienced is mostly or purely a manifestation of social conditioning and sometimes clout chasing where claims are exaggerated or fabricated. Blindly believing alleged victims carries a significant risk of victimizing otherwise innocent people and we need to move back to some middle ground. Especially considering the biologically determined nature of human sexual interaction - which is never black and white and, frankly, has always been a game of overcoming reluctance. Hesitating and not saying NO cannot be treated the same way as overt rape without criminalizing desirable (for both men and women) sexual interaction. Yes, the chase is extremely important, for both sexes, and we see the same dynamics throughout the animal kingdom.