1. 

   mustaq
   February 18th, 2010 - 22:55

   Robert, I don’t know what to say really.

   Firstly, when I came across ATAAW, I had this sixth sense feeling that anyone contributing there would end up on some sort of “Blacklist”, and at one stage I was seriously contemplating if ATAAW was some sort of outcast community and if participating there would result in one being ostracised from the Joomla Community ( talk about fear and freedom )

   The membership of ATAAW currently is very diverse, ranging from OSM members to those new to Joomla, in between is a sprinkling of ex founders and ex Team members who left for reasons they would know best.

   Coming back to the issue at hand, I don’t know the dynamics surrounding the issues regarding the member you were requested to Ban, those are all secondary. The main question to ask is if there is any Legal grounds for this type of request to be made. What does the Joomla TOS, Code of Conduct etc have to say about this ? Are these type of engagements covered. Is this legal in terms of International and National Constitutional Laws ?

   Perhaps there was some meeting where it was resolved that this particular member would not be allowed to join any community ( and all efforts be made to remove him from these communities ) and that anyone engaging with him would run the risk of being outcast themselves, quite scary I know, but it is a “Clear and Present Danger”.

   Some levels of our Community can be described as having a very political like culture. Sometimes I think there is always some type of serious , private interactions between certain key roleplayers inside ( COC/OSM ) and outside the organisation ( ATAAW members ), I will call that the Inner Circle, that affects the way our Joomlaverse spins. I really hope that you are not being used as a Pawn. I think that if there is any type of politiking going on , those responsible should come out in the open and do these battles, and leave the rest of us out of it.

   Come to think of it, maybe this whole thing was a mis-communication that will be cleared up with a follow up email. I would like to think that we have some freedom of association, freedom of speech etc… all within well defined boundaries and yet be able to be valued as members of the Joomla Community.

   On a personal note, don’t let this put a damper on your weekend. Lets find a way to remove the Fears that everyone seems to be saying everyone has, so that that cannot be used as an excuse anymore.

   We should all be putting Joomla first ( and be really really honest about that ) and put personal/past differences aside.

   ( REPLY )
   • 

     Robert Vining
     February 19th, 2010 - 00:24

     Hi Mustaq,

     I too was a bit concerned early on whether ATAAW was truly a Network of professionals or rather a lynch mob to burn down the palace. But after being a member there for 6 months now, I have to say it’s a really great place to network, share knowledge about Joomla and read up on a lot of information I may not have had the opportunity to see.

     As I have said in the past, there’s no doubt in my mind ATAAW is and was needed at the time that it came about, and I feel it serves a great purpose in the whole scheme of things.

     It’s brought more awareness to Joomla, a renewed effort to the project both on and off property, and it gives folks who might otherwise keep to themselves an opportunity to speak.

     But it’s done that solely on the idea that everyone has a voice and should be heard. And from my experience, it doesn’t take long to figure out when someone’s blowing smoke up your butt or if they truly have a legitimate point of view. All with no ban button in sight.

     Now that’s not to say we allow spammers to come in and set up shop there, we have guidelines to help keep the conversation within reason, but it’s totally community action oriented, not moderated by other members with censorship.

     And to be honest, I think that’s why I have taken the stance I have on this subject because I continue to see threat after threat roll out of the New York office of Joomla if you want to call it that. This particular note above was generated from Australia. But either way, this type of censorship will not be tolerated in an open community, and I cannot participate in good conscience with a group that tries to rule that way. Thus my decision to withdraw from the Joomla.org forum admin position that I was asked to help out with.

     The ironic part is, I was made aware of the request for help as Admin of the Joomla Forum on the ATAAW network originally. Funny how it’s the same network that is supposedly the reason I won’t be allowed to volunteer now.

     ( REPLY )
2. 

   Marcos
   February 19th, 2010 - 13:59

   Robert, don’t let this undermine your love for Joomla. Full speed ahead with ATAAW which is precisely to help having a better…Joomla!

   “It just works and does well at bringing people together. Something the Joomla Community sorely needed.”

   ( REPLY )
3. 

   arlen
   February 19th, 2010 - 14:08

   You were far more courteous in your reply than I would have been, Robert. I doubt seriously I could have kept the phrase “jack-booted thug” out had I been writing it.

   I mean, I fully support the right of anyone, including the Joomla project, to deny access to those behaving badly on their property. But that’s where it ends. We have a saying, “Your rights end at my nose.” It’s nothing short of arrogance to assume the right to control who may access other people’s websites.

   If we’re truly going to allow such guilt by association, then no one can be permitted to participate in the project, because if you are guilty because you allow him on a site not controlled or owned by Joomla (and which clearly states it is an independent site) then I guess I’m guilty as well, because I’m willing to let you participate on any site I control. And, since the person who wrote you is also willing to let you continue to participate on the forums, that person themselves is also guilty so must be removed from whatever office they hold.

   That’s the thing about guilt by association; we’re *all* associated, therefore we’re *all* guilty.

   ( REPLY )
4. 

   Amy Stephen
   February 19th, 2010 - 14:18

   How to kill a community.

   I agree with Arlen. I’m guilty, too.

   Lead on, Robert.

   ( REPLY )
5. 

   Brian Teeman
   February 19th, 2010 - 15:09

   It’s my ball and I wont let you play with it if you are still friends with Tommy

   ( REPLY )
   • 

     Robert Vining
     February 19th, 2010 - 15:35

     You don’t even have to be friends with Tommy… you just have to show up at the same ballpark as him and you don’t get to play anymore.

     ( REPLY )
6. 

   Peter Russell
   February 19th, 2010 - 15:32

   Robert, you’ve joined the club. Receiving an email such as the one you mention, is something you should have framed. And every time someone receives one of these ghastly attempts to censure we make sure the *whole* world knows about it. Oncde again, I find it difficult to reconcile the sheer stupidity of the actions of the so-called leadership.

   ( REPLY )
7. 

   HarryB
   February 19th, 2010 - 15:33

   Took a while, but looks like Nineteen Eighty-Four has finally arrived.

   Keep the faith Robert…

   ( REPLY )
8. 

   Ewout
   February 19th, 2010 - 15:53

   In a way, I am glad you got that email. Although it is sad that your help is lost to the project, it is a gain for ATAAW. I’ll explain.
   1. From the mere fact that such an email is written it is clear that OSM considers ATAAW to be highly relevant to Joomla. So not only is the project relevant to ATAAW, now the other way around has also proven to be true.
   2. You were told you cannot do anything for Joomla as ATAAW host as it is, and the alternative would have been to ask you to remove that member from ATAAW. So clearly there is an implicit acceptance that Joomla has no business asking you to remove any ATAAW members.

   So, on the whole, again aside from this being a sad development for you, I think it is good to receive OSM confirmation that ATAAW is relevant to Joomla and independent. ATAAW aims to be relevant for Joomla by filling in some gaps in the project. To do so successfully in the current circumstances, ATAAW must be independent.

   I’ll infer a third silver lining of the cloud. ATAAW thankfully is not a community of people who are or will be blacklisted: most of the new OSM board members were and are ATAAW members. Their presence on ATAAW together with that member who is not welcome on joomla.org is ok. So with the exception of you as a host, absurd as the exception is, all ATAAW members clearly remain welcome in the project.

   Let’s tie the project down in future to these three points that are now confirmed by OSM: ATAAW is relevant to Joomla, Joomla has no business interfering, and ATAAW members are welcome in Joomla.

   At the same time, let’s stress a fourth point ourselves: OSM members and Joomla volunteers are welcome in ATAAW. I think it would be a good self-explanatory demonstration what ATAAW is about if you were to personally invite those OSM members who are not on ATAAW yet to join. Show the positive difference, and show it off.

   ( REPLY )
9. 

   Manoel J. Silva
   February 19th, 2010 - 16:06

   Make every Tommy in the world proud to be considered your friend Robert!

   ( REPLY )
10. 

    Louis Landry
    February 19th, 2010 - 19:05

    Hi guys and gals,

    I wanted to state a few things on the topic at hand and then I’ll be putting yet another thing behind me as I continue to work on trying to make the Joomla project better.

    Firstly @ Robert.

    I can understand your frustration and disappointment at the email you received from Brad. Hopefully you two can clear up any misunderstandings that may have come from the exchange, those are always unfortunate. You can see the Joomla! Leadership Team discussing the event at: http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-leadership/browse_thread/thread/ea257755b6ff176f Hopefully that is helpful in understanding where Brad was coming from in his email to you. I know that the leadership team doesn’t want you to not be a contributing member of the project, and would very much look forward to your help in any number of areas.

    That being said, if Brad is uncomfortable working with you in initiatives he is leading then that isn’t something anyone can force him to do and I would respect that just as I would respect your wishes if there was someone you didn’t want to work with for whatever reason. The “up in arms” approach rarely leads to any satisfactory solutions to any problems and I hope that very soon cooler heads will prevail all around. Otherwise, we all lose.

    @ Peter

    As part of the core team you were actively involved in “censuring” several people when you felt it appropriate. In fact, one of them being the gentleman who posted directly above you — Brian. You were actively involved in his leaving the core team, and subsequent “censuring” as well. You have obviously felt in some cases it isn’t so hard to reconcile such actions. How about you take the drama down a notch or two and let’s focus on conversation not rhetoric… solutions not problems.

    @ Ewout

    1. Of course the ATAAW site is highly relevant to Joomla. It would be silly to think otherwise. There are a great many wonderful and valued community members registered there and I am sure there are some really great and valuable conversations going on there. I really have never heard anyone in project leadership state otherwise. There have been times when some of us are frustrated with some conversations that go on there. There are certainly some of what I would call inappropriate comments directed at people on that site. There are likely some people that I don’t particularly care for on that site. None of those things make the site irrelevant or not valuable to the Joomla project or its community. As always, the good comes with the bad.

    2. How on earth would the Joomla project ever believe it can force someone to ban someone from a site that they run? I mean anyone can *ask* anyone to do anything. There is nothing wrong with that. I can *ask* you to not take the stance that ATAAW is somehow in battle or an enemy of the Joomla project. At the end of the day though, that decision yours to make and yours alone. Also, in reality what Robert was told (or at least the intention) was *not* that he “cannot do anything for Joomla as ATAAW host as it is”, but that Brad did not want to work with him on the initiatives they were evidently working on. Not the same thing, and the nuance of the wording matters as you well know as an attorney I believe.

    3. With the exception of Ivo and I think perhaps one other person, who have been banned from all project resources, anyone and everyone is welcome to be a part of and participate in the Joomla project regardless of whether they are members of the ATAAW site or not. That doesn’t mean that anyone and everyone will be able to do any given task obviously. Some things require more trust or skill than others, but there is plenty to do and despite what may have been said all are welcome.

    @ All

    The notion that the Joomla project intends to police the internet based on your social graph connectivity to an individual is flat out not true. That is some serious jumping to conclusions and really isn’t helping anyone get anything done or make anything better. It is really easy to just jump on a band wagon and say “down with X” or try to “connect dots” with other experiences you may have had. It is more productive however to talk to people and figure out what the real story may be, or what the full circumstances are. Sometimes that isn’t fruitful, but I think we can all agree it is better road to take for everyone’s sake.

    I’ve said my piece and intend to move on. From what I can tell, Brad would like to talk to Robert privately about whatever misunderstandings may have taken place. I have done my best to clarify the views of the Joomla! leadership team as I understand them. It won’t be productive to have a long and drawn out back and forth as they never are. So that being said, I leave you with this… My email address is louis.landry@joomla.org If you would like to talk to me about this or related issues, please feel free to send me an email.

    Cheers,
    Louis

    ( REPLY )
    • 

      Robert Vining
      February 19th, 2010 - 19:39

      Let’s call a spade a spade Louis and not misconstrue what has occurred.

      4 weeks ago, Brad posted on google groups he was looking for a new Admin to take over the Joomla forum as he had too much on his plate. I replied, we spoke and agreed I would start to help and if he felt it was needed, he may bring in additional help to co-admin the forum if he felt my work was not up to speed for the needs of the forum maintenance that was planned.

      I was an active member in the ATAAW community at the time, was actually referred to Brad’s post from ATAAW to the google group announcement, and Brad was well aware of my membership status there at that time.

      We touched base a few times over the past few weeks, and Brad said we were waiting for Sam to set up a new SVN for us to work in since the forums are on a separate server than the other j sites. We actually spoke the day before this debacle.

      But it wasn’t until I was made an admin at ATAAW that these new found reservations from Brad were brought to light. So I find your words a bit on the ‘lets cover this up, we screwed the pooch AGAIN!’ side of things.

      ( REPLY )
      • 

        Louis Landry
        February 19th, 2010 - 19:59

        I have in no way said that anything you just described didn’t happen. You, however, seem to have interpreted Brad’s decision to not want to continue that initiative with you as some sort of mandate from the project leadership about your status as an admin on ATAAW. This simply isn’t the case.

        You will believe what makes sense to you, nothing I can do about that, but what I said stands and I stand behind it. I don’t necessarily agree with Brad’s reservations and I wouldn’t share them personally, but I respect his right to have them. That doesn’t equate to any sort of coverup or group screwing up. That is the part I find to be a misunderstanding.

        I haven’t misconstrued what you said, I just don’t share your view that it is any more than Brad not wanting to work on something with you for his own reasons. I won’t speak for Brad on those specifics. At any rate, have a good night.

        Cheers,
        Louis
      • 

        Andrew Eddie
        February 19th, 2010 - 20:24

        Robert, if we wanted to cover it up, it wouldn’t be on the public leadership list now would it. I’ve openly stated I think Brad was wrong in his action, and you deserve an apology even though you chose not to deal with it directly with him yourself first. Given history, I can understand why both of you acted the way you did (though disagree with the way either of you have handled it). That said, I’m sure you are both more than mature enough to some sort of reasonable outcome – and if not, there are procedures for dealing with that as well. If you aren’t interested in any sort of reconciliation process, as extended to you, then I of course understand that as well.
    • 

      Peter Russell
      February 20th, 2010 - 05:05

      @Louis, you can’t even present facts fairly. Sure, I didn’t agree with some things in the past as I don’t necessarily agree with things happening now. But please check your facts. I didn’t vote for Brian’s “censureship”. Quite the opposite, I wasn’t even at that particular Summit and, therefore, not able to vote at all. Thoughts and actions are entirely different things. You voted for censure, I on the other hand could not even vote. So don’t try to paint a picture that’s not true.

      ( REPLY )
11. 

    Amy Stephen
    February 19th, 2010 - 21:05

    Good post, Ewout.

    It’s pretty disappointing to see Ivo flogged on the Leadership Team email list. Brad’s been flogging him on the Community email list, too. The blog post shared from Ivo *was* very offensive and crude and rude, but certainly not illegal.

    Enough. Leave the kid alone. You guys don’t want him on joomla.org, fine. He asked me for my forgiveness and I forgave him. That’s behind us. I’ve done many people wrong over the years and I appreciate it when they forgive me, too.

    I’m glad Robert posted what Brad did. I am tired to death of Brad’s bullying. I’d send him a note saying so, but then he’d remind me, I am never ever ever ever allowed to email him again. That directive was issued me the day I opened ATAAW and before there was a single post.

    I hope the next time the Leadership board lights up, it’s something worthy of the honor.

    ( REPLY )
    • 

      Andrew Eddie
      February 19th, 2010 - 21:36

      Amy, one thing you need to realise is that this issue is not about you. It’s wonderful that Ivo has apologised to you, he’s not been so forthcoming to the many others including me and you have no idea how far this extends (because you weren’t there!). Leadership is about making tough choices and I have personally been at the brunt of dealing with every one of Ivo’s internal and external outbursts. He *has* been extended grace but decided to abuse that gift.

      ( REPLY )
      • 

        Robert Vining
        February 19th, 2010 - 23:23

        And one thing you need to realize Andrew is, this issue is not about Ivo.

        Do I approve of what you posted in the groups about Ivo? Hell NO I don’t.

        Is what you posted in the group thread wrong and WAY out of line. Yep.

        Was I involved with any of those conversations, the recipient of any of the abuse, or witness any of these type of actions from said person? No.

        So now let’s look at what this issue I raise here is about.

        Being told that I cannot be trusted because I have the power to exile someone you don’t approve of from an off-property community and don’t exercise that power upon your wishes.

        This is the moral of the story and why names were left out of the original post.

        Let’s look at it from my perspective for just a minute… it’s why the story was written in public.

        I am trying to make an honest effort here to get you guys to OPEN YOUR EYES.

        If I would of had this conversation in private with any of the leadership group members defending this action by Brad I would still be getting the same bully treatment I got in the first email.

        This is not about Ivo. This is about you and me.
      • 

        Andrew Eddie
        February 20th, 2010 - 03:46

        Robert, I don’t know you very well so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt it was a careless slip of the keyboard that you are accusing *all* the leadership team (which includes me) of being bullies. My comments made to Brad and you in public are the same as you would receive from me in private.

        I don’t see that this matter is irreconcilable but that’s really up to you and Brad. The Code of Conduct that Brad is bound by is very clear that he has to at least attempt to sort it out with you first. If he can’t, then there is a process we can go through to attempt to bring closure to the issue but I’d prefer not to conduct that process as trial-by-blog/twitter-comment if you don’t mind. I can understand your compulsion to lash out and kick someone, I really can, but there are better ways to handle this.

        As for Louis, my email is andrew.eddie@joomla.org and if you or anyone else wants to talk about it, my inbox is open.
      • 

        Amy Stephen
        February 20th, 2010 - 12:36

        Andrew –

        I have consistently stated the project acted appropriately on Ivo’s ban and that his consequences with joomla.org are his, and his alone. I encouraged him to make amends for his bad behavior. You know I do not approve of what he did last year in January.

        But, we are talking about Ivo participating at ATAAW, not joomla.org. Mitch, Wilco, and I talked about this early on and together, we decided to include him. For Mitch, there was no question, he felt no one should be excluded. For Wilco, it was not as easy and he was hesitant. I was somewhere in between.

        To be clear, I am glad we gave him a chance. Ivo is getting along with people and he wants to participate. I have no complaints about his behavior. If he was posting garbage or hostile towards others, you *know* I would deal with it. I have absolutely no doubt that Robert will put an immediate end to any inappropriate behavior. He’s from Texas. He’s got boots. Etc.

        Leadership *is* about making tough choices. I stand behind my choices and I accept the consequences that come with it. I cannot tell you that I am 100% confident we did the right thing, but I can tell you with complete confidence that, in general, I believe our community would benefit from everyone agreeing to start over with one another.

        I am very confident that Robert can help ATAAW take this next step. I think my stepping aside is important and I think he and Brad will learn to communicate. I wish I could have gotten there with Brad but it didn’t happen.

        I think everyone should expect more community flareups because there are a lot of unresolved problems and those things start coming to light when there is a place for open discussion. The Code of Conduct and approaching the leadership for help has not worked and many problems are not getting solved. People can blame ATAAW if they want but it is not the source of our problems. We will work through these issues but it will be challenging.
12. 

    mustaq
    February 19th, 2010 - 23:16

    Let’s not lose focus here on the issue at hand, this is not about Ivo or the circumstances surrounding his ban from joomla.org.

    Thanks, Louis Landry, for your post here and on the Mailing List, that helps to shed some light on some of the concerns raised about Brad Baker’s email.

    @Robert. I hope you receive the apology you deserve from Brad Baker.

    Looking forward , there should be protocol in place to prevent anyone from taking unilateral steps that can or could impact on Joomla in general.

    ( REPLY )
13. 

    Gobezu Sewu
    February 20th, 2010 - 00:33

    Allow me to single out Ivo as a case in my reply and say I am very glad that I know what Ivo is about and I am grateful that Louis took the initiative to bring this to the day light. I found myself very upset and have so many words to say but as @mustag mentioned maybe the issue at hand is Robert and he being excluded which is wrong!

    But I am sorry but I can’t let the case Ivo be and will address it here and in every other context I pass by and

    Ivo should be excluded from whatever context he might show up within including ATAAW.

    Amy’s move of being so accommodative when someone doesn’t even accept who you are and what you are is not proportional and is not even fair

    There are no apologies for a piece he wrote deliberately and posted on a website. It’s not as if its oops I said that, or oops I did that, its as if yes at your face and let me just say sorry and allow me to come in. Well, at least that’s the way I see it.

    ( REPLY )
    • 

      Amy Stephen
      February 20th, 2010 - 12:58

      I am sad to hear that you feel that way since I want you to feel welcome at ATAAW. We decided to create a place for everyone to come. We also decided that includes Ivo.

      What he did a year ago January when he posted that blog post was completely in appropriate. There are other things he said, too, that were likely worse. He said things about Louis that were so disgusting I wouldn’t repeat it.

      Ivo has made a NUMBER of mistakes in how he treated people during his time at joomla.org. I make no excuses for his behavior. As you know when you expressed your frustration when learning of his ban, I responded that I believed joomla.org acted appropriately and that Ivo’s consequences were his and his alone.

      Ivo’s behavior on the site has been fine. He has not caused trouble with others. He is trying. He wants to be a part of the Joomla! community and we allowed him another chance.

      If you ever feel like anyone, including me, is creating a hostile and unwelcoming environment for you, tell Robert. I picked Robert as the next host in large part because he’s got a big heart. But, he can kick ass with the best of ‘em. He’s not going to stand by idly and allow anyone to harm someone else.

      I am sorry for any discomfort or concern my actions in allowing everyone to participate have caused you. I want you to feel at home at ATAAW. I will tell you, I do not share the views you saw presented on that blog post. I did not like being the target of that rage. But, he apologized and asked me for my forgiveness, and I did forgive him.

      ( REPLY )
14. 

    Thomas
    February 20th, 2010 - 03:02

    Andrew says “Leadership is about making tough choices”. Thats true. Maybe you should think about tough choices concerning Brad. His personal opinion and thoughts about another person are his own, but as soon as he is acting as joomla.org, he should be aware about what he is doing and maybe discuss the mail before hitting the send-button.

    ( REPLY )
    • 

      Andrew Eddie
      February 20th, 2010 - 03:59

      Thomas, there are lots of different ways this could have, and still can pan out.

      ( REPLY )
15. 

    Robert Vining
    February 20th, 2010 - 04:20

    I will email you tomorrow Andrew, it’s been a long night here in the USA. Just the short version, Brad and I spoke for 30 minutes a few hours ago and we agree to disagree on this matter.

    It still doesn’t make it right in my mind, but he’s entitled to his own opinion.

    ( REPLY )
16. 

    Herman Peeren
    February 20th, 2010 - 07:03

    One of the roles of ATAAW in the Joomla-sphere was/is to search for better ways of communicating. “How to handdle misbehaviour” is an issue that has been discussed on both the “official” joomla sites and mailing lists as the “unofficial”. ATAAW has experimented to do it without moderating, leaving more responsability to react against unfair or untrue postings to the other members of the community. I don’t say that all fora could or should operate without moderation, but to me it is valuable to see how it works on ATAAW. I felt more free to write because of that freedom and some beautiful things have emerged that would not have been published otherwise. I like it very much to see how people take their responsibility that this freedom brings along.

    Ivo has been tolerated on ATAAW, even though a lot of us knew about his intolerable misbehaviour in the past. It was an important part of the experiment, how to handle this. Of course there are borders to what anyone can write on ATAAW and writing like Ivo did in the past will certainly not be tolerated. Other members on ATAAW often disagree with him on topics and they write that too or correct him. He is treated as an adult as long as he behaves like that too.

    Disagreement can be respectful. Respect and trust are important and that is also part of the problem that has happened now.

    ( REPLY )
    • 

      Robert Vining
      February 20th, 2010 - 14:00

      Well said Herman and I could not agree more with your statements.

      ( REPLY )
      • 

        Peter Russell
        February 20th, 2010 - 15:54

        Herman, so eloquently put.
17. 

    Ewout
    February 20th, 2010 - 10:47

    I’ll take this opportunity to suggest what lesson can be learned here.

    Exactly one year after Ivo published what was in the image Andrew posted, which I have to say was very severely offensive, my personal and professional integrity were severely offended by someone signing as a member of OSM. Almost one month later, Brad’s email to Rob now became an issue because it was sent in function.
    Clearly people in OSM should be more careful about what is sent as a communication ex officio and what is not. This is not only in the interest of people like myself and Rob, but also in the interest of the project which bears the consequences of what is done by the individuals representing it. An example might be taken from many professional firms, which apply the ‘four eyes’ principle before anything goes out.

    ( REPLY )
    • 

      Andrew Eddie
      February 20th, 2010 - 16:57

      While I accept that, there must also be a commensurate response. Those in leadership have a burden of greater responsibility and accountability placed on their shoulders whether they like it or not. However, those asking that of said leaders (whether OSM, the Joomla project, and yes ATAAW has leaders) must also act themselves as they are asking others to act. Respect is not a commodity, it is earned and it’s a two-way street. Those that have been in the trenches long enough know that it’s a very narrow path to walk, and those that have never walked it really have no idea how hard that path is (yet, are very quick to advise those that do).

      Ultimately the lesson for all is expect to be treated how you treat others; and whatever the “action”, we have the choice to “react” or “respond”.

      ( REPLY )
      • 

        Amy Stephen
        February 20th, 2010 - 19:05

        I agree with you on the “very narrow path” to walk point. I also think, Andrew, that as more people get involved and things open up, this way of communicating is going to happen more and more.

        Ewout offers a good idea for all of us – ask someone before you send the letter or blog post. But, let’s also embrace openness and introduce topics for discussion, and be glad we are actually talking.

        You are a big part of what makes openness work, Andrew.
18. 

    Steve Fisher
    February 20th, 2010 - 11:54

    Wow. This is not cool no matter how you look at it. I too have been burned by the official Joomla! leadership. Still, there have been many great people in the community (some in positions of leadership) that have been super helpful and very gracious.

    ( REPLY )
19. 

    Brian Teeman
    February 20th, 2010 - 12:14

    Just to clarify Brad is not a member of CoC

    ( REPLY )
20. 

    Brian Teeman
    February 20th, 2010 - 12:14

    oops i meant to say Brad is not a member of OSM.

    ( REPLY )
21. 

    Scott Cooper
    February 20th, 2010 - 12:27

    But he (among others) does “oversee the operation of the Open Source Matters board”. That is a according to the OSM website.

    ( REPLY )
22. 

    Ewout
    February 20th, 2010 - 13:54

    @Brian
    The last time I read the statute I took it as meaning that the COC in which Brad has a seat is one of OSM’s two decision making bodies, and the COC has no independent formative standing that I am aware of. But I could be wrong, and structure is another discussion probably best left for another time…

    ( REPLY )
23. 

    Dan Chay
    February 20th, 2010 - 14:24

    Under “positions” (what we say we want), we usually will find motivating “interests” (needs, fears, desires, hopes, and concerns). I see considerable potential for agreement on mutual interests if they could be sufficiently unpacked, and if people were willing.

    Say possibly regarding:
    * Racist and misogynist language
    * Coercive language and/or behavior
    * Unilateral actions on part of leadership
    * Clarity by leadership with regard to representation
    * Ideal relationships with important outlier forums like ATAAW
    * Limits to guilt by association
    * Allowing for differences
    * More?

    …

    As a tangent, reading that one astonishingly offensive post for me was helpful by way of better understanding this conversation. For me, abstract allusions often are significantly inadequate.

    What I don’t have any sense of is whether or not the offender wrote that due to some local subculture of learned behavior and/or English as a second or third language — that potentially could be unlearned over time — or whether it resulted from a deep-rooted neuro-psychopathology of the sort we find in most serious destructive personalities. ATAAW eventually might give insight into this question.

    Thank you.

    ( REPLY )
24. 

    Lawrence Meckan
    February 20th, 2010 - 22:09

    The problem here is not primarily people, the problem is misuse of process.

    The Joomla Code of Conduct states the following as its opening statement:
    “This Code of Conduct covers your behavior as a member of the Joomla! community, in any forum, mailing list, Wiki, web site, IRC channel, install-fest, public meeting or private correspondence.”

    From there, it’s not hard for any person to liberally apply the Code of Conduct to any Joomla related site, be it on official ground, blogs, or third party communities such as ATAAW.

    By giving explicit licence on “any”, people then feel justified to issue notices such as what has happened here. Put simply: the gate is too wide, too broad and too easy to exploit based on personal feelings and potential personality clashes.

    Perhaps it’s time the Code of Conduct went back to those just operating in any official capacity as part of the project, instead of this antinomianism where anyone, anywhere can get served, for pretty much anything..

    That way, those who are responsible to the project, such as those in COC, OSM, or various management and infrastructure capacities across the world are aware of their heightened responsibility thanks to the Code of Conduct, and the rest of the community recognises that the Code of Conduct, along with ongoing community feedback from communities such as ATAAW should safeguard against such behaviour.

    ( REPLY )
25. 

    Herman Peeren
    February 21st, 2010 - 03:12

    For completeness:
    more discussions about this subject on http://www.alltogetherasawhole.org/profiles/blogs/respect-and-trust-an

    ( REPLY )
    • 

      Andrew Eddie
      February 21st, 2010 - 06:51

      Seems like a bit of a deadlocked discussion (kudos to Jacques – I really liked the way you articulated your alternative view). Can I offer a compromise? Would it be unreasonable for the powers that be at ATAAW to consider an alternate feed that goes to Joomla Connect that is vetted. Then if someone does go feral for whatever reason (a spammer putting up links to naughty pictures for example just at the right time), you are protecting yourselves from a potentially embarrassing mess to clean up (as is the case for anyone) where you are, in fact, officially on-property. Sound reasonable?

      ( REPLY )
      • 

        Robert Vining
        February 21st, 2010 - 07:03

        Email Sent Andrew.
      • 

        Robert Vining
        February 21st, 2010 - 07:11

        Also, in response to your request of an alternative feed from ATAAW. That is already in place and the poster must use a specific keyword in the tags area of the post to get it to push through to jConnect.

        However we are definitely open to reviewing this keyword to better adhere to Joomla Guidelines if the need is present.

        I will say currently that not very many posts ever make it through to jConnect as it stands, but that’s a discussion for a different day.
      • 

        Brian Teeman
        February 21st, 2010 - 11:08

        Every site that has a feed on jconnect is vulnerable to the same problem and I assumed that is why all jconnect feed items are both vetted and have a report button (BTW there appears to be a missing language string on the report button)
    • 

      Andrew Eddie
      February 21st, 2010 - 15:48

      Brian, that’s true, but Connect wasn’t really set up to take what is effectively a feed from a forum.

      Robert, all posts make it to Connect unless there is a technical problem, but they are moderated as stated in the terms of usage.

      ( REPLY )
26. 

    Spacemonkey
    February 21st, 2010 - 10:41

    Just want to make something clear for everyone about the impetus behind the zero-censorship attitude behind the formation of ATAAW. I’m not a forum guy, never have, never will be – so my feelings on the matter are absolutely not personal. At the time I’d never heard of any of the people that were banned (except for Brian, who is now back) and had zero personal knowledge of what was going on in that regard.

    My stance on this was that some folks felt that open discussion was being stifled on the official project forums, and that the main impetus behind ATAAW was to provide a place where folks could discuss things openly without fear of reprisal or censure.

    Immediately the topic of what to do about banning people came up. My statement was pretty logical – if you’re starting a community so everyone can talk openly then you really cannot ban people. To do otherwise would be completely hypocritical and defeat the whole purpose behind starting the new community site.

    However some folks started posting things that were inappropriate and offensive, so we agreed on temporary bans until they cooled off. AFAICT this approach has worked well, and the majority of reported posts were spam accounts anyway.

    There is a very fine line between free speech and civility. To be honest I don’t think there is one True Way(TM) to tiptoe down that tightrope, and as such there will always be controversy and dramarama.

    ( REPLY )
    • 

      Andrew Eddie
      February 21st, 2010 - 15:57

      I’d just like to point out that the 3 development lists “on property” have no moderation except for people wanting to post naughty pictures. This appears to have worked well for, what, over a year now? No moderation is no longer the issue for me because I know it actually can work and remain well above the grey area.

      ( REPLY )
      • 

        Amy Stephen
        February 21st, 2010 - 16:57

        /me is glad to see Andrew agrees on that point. Adults do not require moderation. They can – and should – be allowed to direct their own conversations to successful conclusion.
      • 

        Brian Teeman
        February 21st, 2010 - 17:58

        Sorry andrew but thats not actualy true and I have asked for it to be unblocked
      • 

        Lawrence Meckan
        February 21st, 2010 - 19:58

        I’ve just tested this and confirmed that moderation is still in effect for the Joomla CMS Dev list.
      • 

        Andrew Eddie
        February 23rd, 2010 - 17:24

        Correct Amy. Adults don’t need to be moderated. Sadly, age is not necessarily the best indicator of whether one is capable of adult behaviour. And all adults are subject to behaving like children on occasions.

        Brian, they should be no issue with getting you unblocked.

        Lawrence, if you behave like an adult and remain within the context of the lists (development) you can engage. If you are going to be a nuisance, then I will make no apologies for coming down on you like a ton of bricks. If you want to help with coding, or have questions about it, that’s fine, but I’m not interested in giving you a platform for your ever-imaginative conspiracy theories (you have your own site for that). Fair?
      • 

        Andrew Eddie
        February 23rd, 2010 - 17:32

        I should add that it’s not so much that we “don’t” have moderation, but that we’ve never had to use it except for people not using the lists for what they are intended. Virtually everyone involved, to their credit, uses those lists for their intended purpose. If you don’t use those lists for their intended purpose, don’t complain if someone says to go elsewhere or in an extreme case you get a tap on the shoulder from someone. They choice is up to the individual.
    • 

      Lawrence Meckan
      February 24th, 2010 - 00:43

      Andrew,

      When you came down on me with a ton of bricks, I was providing UX guidance and feedback based on my.. what 6 or so years of UX/accessibility/industry best practice design with the codebase at that point. The context and content of my posts still remains nicely archived by Google, not censored or “burning the books” by any third party. I’m more than willing to be judged by the peanut galleries across the world for what I said, since it was neither offensive, let alone naughty pictures, or a “conspiracy theory”.

      Having a short 6 week UX cycle at the end of the dev tree just reflects on the professionalism of Joomla. Drupal has gone ahead in leaps and bounds with its UX cycles throughout development of D7, and part of the reason I posted what I did so that those new to the Joomla coding cycle understood exactly what they were getting themselves in for. The 3 years I did in team for both Mambo and Joomla regarding best practice design should reflect on that.

      So 2 posts regarding the history of UX within Joomla, UX behaviours and design patterns and externalised testing for UX and accessibility wasn’t enough on context, especially when Torkil was asking for wireframes, tests and the like, it seems. Supposedly, posts on UX and how to make Joomla’s UX better wasn’t for the intended purpose that Torkil wants. Anyone else see a disparity?

      I feel it is offensive and a poor application of the Code of Conduct that you filibuster conspiracy theory at me, especially including taking a dig at my business. If you have a personality clash with me, just man up and say so. I am willing and able to negotiate some equitable common ground between us in order to mitigate it.

      Perhaps it’s the whole designer vs developer gap that you’re misinterpreting? I mentioned at length in state demos, externalised testing during those two posts, and since then I’ve done such things with 1.6 over it’s dev cycle. You wanted solutions, and I’ve demonstrated them already. There is code experiments that go along with these UX tests, you know.

      I’m willing to build common ground. I’ve adequately demonstrated that by doing outside testing on the UX of Joomla itself, even after your moderation What are you prepared to do in response?

      ( REPLY )
      • 

        Amy Stephen
        February 24th, 2010 - 21:09

        Lawrence –

        I am already posting behind you on ATAAW after 2 days on our site. You are already spinning your conspiracy theories. In the two days you have been on ATAAW, you have alerted members about your incorrect concerns about the assets of non-profits and how Google is looking more and more like our “suitor.” Yes, all linked to a blog about Elin’s open source business model post. (See ATAAW for an example.)

        If it’s not conspiracy theories, then, it’s completely empty and pompous lectures on software development methodologies that sort of sound like there is a point in there and how the developers should stop, delete everything they did, take your ideas and do it right. Otherwise, Joomla! sucks. (Read above for an example.)

        It is also of interest how you talk about all of these things you have supposedly demonstrated — but to whom, or where, that’s never clear. It wouldn’t matter so much if you were just bragging, but you do it in insulting ways, claiming your invisible work is much better than what has been committed to the SVN, and how your work that no one ever saw was rejected, calling into question the ethics of others. (See above for example.)

        If someone warns you that you have to behave and be mindful of not having a negative impact on others, you start claiming THEY are misbehaving and then, in a very offensive twist, begin acting like you are in a position to negotiate some sort of equitable ground with them (Huh?). (See above for example).

        Since it does not appear that you have changed *at all* and since you have decided to jump right back into our various community spaces using the same approaches that got you banned to begin with, we really need to warn people not to waste their time worrying about the things you say. (See this comment as an example, and the ones I have already started leaving on ATAAW, and the ones Andrew is promising on the Developer lists.)

        Was that ‘manned up’ enough for you Lawrence?
27. 

    Lawrence Meckan
    February 26th, 2010 - 08:10

    Amy,

    No, it wasn’t ‘manned up’ for me. It’s Andrew’s claims of no moderation which have been somewhat rebalanced that I want to ascertain the root cause for, especially since the content of said posts didn’t fall under any stated terms that Andrew has mentioned. I ask he approach me in his time.

    I’ll deal with the ATAAW stuff, of which 90% of your comment focusses, at ATAAW.

    ( REPLY )

Leave a comment