It's been an eventful couple of days, that's for sure... Eventful enough that I feel it's necessary to clarify a few points.
First off, I want to express my sincere thanks to everyone that has reached out, in public or in private, to express their support in this situation. I genuinely appreciate it, even if I haven't had a chance to respond to everyone directly. Thank you all.
I'm especially gratified to hear from those people, particularly women, with whom I have worked most closely over the years in Drupal. Even people I've not talked to in a while, whether we got along or not, have voiced that I’m anything but a misogynist, and to state anything to the contrary is simply wrong.
A handful of people have taken me up on my offer to talk privately if they have concerns, and I thank them for doing so. It seemed that our conversations made them much more comfortable and OK with who I am and that I am no threat to them, or at least that's the impression I got. Again, thank you to those who took the time to talk to me.
I have also heard from numerous people, mostly in private, who contacted me to talk about their own "unconventional views or activities". Some are similar to mine, others entirely different, but a common thread is that many of them now feel very, very scared. Scared of what people would do to them if their non-Drupal lives or beliefs were revealed. Scared of what other "unwritten values" they may be violating because a few people in leadership don't like them. That makes me very, very sad. I hope that in time Drupal's leadership will realize that this is no way to run a tolerant community.
Still, there have been a number of assumptions made and comments offered that I feel warrant additional reply, moreso than just inline in a thread somewhere. For that reason I want to highlight a few points here.
Who did what now?
There's some confusion about who in Drupal's leadership took what actions, so let me clarify.
The Community Working Groups (CWG) fielded a number of reports in October/November about stuff I had posted on a private forum outside of Drupal. Later reports, after people started digging, included other information, including my dating profile. They informed me of their existence a month or so after the initial report. In all of their communication with me and and others to which I am privy, they have not found any violation of the Code of Conduct on my part. Their "mediation" attempt between Klaus and I in January consisted of a single interview with both of us, followed by radio-silence until Dries contacted me. I did, however, express to them my main concern was the rumor chain reaching Drupal's leadership, or conference organizers, without my knowledge and my getting blackballed without even knowing it or being able to respond.
Dries, from what I understand, was first informed, without my knowledge, of the matter in early February, by the CWG. Dries' first communication with me was at the end of February, in which he was very clear he had already made up his mind that I needed to leave Drupal, and he first asked, then instructed, me to do so. Dries contacted me again shortly after the Board decision to offer to help me leave quietly by talking to "those that know". I firmly declined both times, as doing so would be to slink away like a coward and let blackmail and a whisper campaign destroy my good name behind me. That is not something I could ever do.
Megan, from what I understand, was first informed of the matter in early November, even before I was, although by a member of the DA staff, not by the CWG. I do not know which member of staff, nor who had brought the matter to them. The first and only contact I had from her was 3 days after I first spoke to Dries, informing me that "per [my] conversation with Dries" I had been removed as a track chair and speaker for DrupalCon Baltimore. I do not know to what degree if any Dries and Megan coordinated their actions and decisions, but her comment suggests it was collaborative. Strictly speaking it was that decision that I appealed to the Board of Directors, and the Board declined to overturn it without any further explanation. I cannot speculate as to their reasoning, but would welcome clarification on their part.
I discussed the possibility of going public and "outing" myself with multiple members of the CWG at different times. It is not a decision I take lightly, and I realize that it may have negative implications for my career due to prejudice in various circles. However, with a whisper campaign painting me as a raving misogynist out to enslave all women (false), based on out of context fragments pulled from a non-public site, in which only one person was willing to talk to me directly and that person did so in order to blackmail me, I had little alternative.
Given that Dries was insistent on my leaving Drupal out the back door, regardless of the harm that would cause to me and to Drupal's public image, and did not show any inclination to discuss otherwise, I had little alternative.
Reputation is critical in our profession. Hell, in our society. My professional career has been built on Drupal, and public presentations have been a key part of my professional activities. I cannot allow my reputation and livelihood to be attacked behind my back without any ability to respond. That would be untenable.
The value of diversity
In my previous post I talked about the value of diversity, and why I like the Drupal community. A heterogeneous group brings different perspectives to the table, even if they're heterogenous about topics other than what's specifically on the table.
In the Drupal and PHP communities, I know:
- Pro-South/Confederacy advocates (reference to the US Civil War, for the non-Americans)
- Anti-vaxers, or at least people sympathetic to anti-vaxers
- Trump voters
- Concealed-carry gun advocates
I disagree with the above beliefs, positions, and affiliations. Some I don't even respect. In some cases I've engaged those people in lively debate. In others, we get along swimmingly because we both know to avoid certain topics. All of them are still productive and constructive members of the community and I count many of them as friends.
Many of them have likely discussed those opinions online somewhere, or even at Drupal events in social settings. Should that exclude them from Drupal? No, I don't believe it should. Drupal needs no ideological litmus tests beyond "can you treat people with respect" and "do you want to make Drupal better".
Regarding my former housemate
A number of people, presumably from in and around Chicago, have commented about a woman who accompanied me to some Drupal events in the area. One of the messages to the CWG that was shared with me mentioned her as well, although I left her out of my earlier post to protect her privacy. I've contacted her and gotten her permission to say this much, however.
The woman in question is acutely autistic. As part of that she is mute (she's physically capable of speech but chooses not to speak), but still communicates very well in writing and online chat. We both learned ASL in order to communicate better with each other. She also has severe social anxiety disorder which means she is extremely shy and introverted, desiring human contact with only one person at a time. Those with Autism tend to fixate on a particular topic or idea, and hers is on a specific person, specifically in the context of D/s relationship. That's been who she is for her entire life.
Why exactly she has that fixation I couldn't say. We discussed it at length with both of the autism therapists I took her to see, both of whom were fully aware of all her details and saw no issue, but I am not at liberty to discuss those sessions, obviously. However, her particular condition means there are very few people who are able to effectively act as caretakers for her, and a few years ago, when she needed a new place to live, I was one of those people and available, so accepted her into my house. (I had recently bought a house with ample space for her to have her own room.)
She is very intelligent and curious and was interested in programming, so after she took a free online coding course I allowed her to help me with some small Drupal core patches. Her shyness, however, prevented her from posting any issues in her own name, so we abandoned that endeavour. She still wanted to learn, though, so I brought her along to a number of Drupal and tech conferences in the Chicago area. "Help a mentally handicapped woman learn about Drupal" is a concept I believed most Drupalers would be 1000% on board with, and for the most part I was correct. We were very open about her autism (at her request, her logic being "I'm not broken, just autistic"), but of course didn't mention the D/s part because, well, that's nobody else's business.
About a year ago ago she moved in with someone else I know, and from everything I've seen is quite happy.
He should have hid it better
A few people have commented that it's somehow my fault for not keeping my private life more private.
First: The level of victim blaming in that sentiment is remarkable. If your privacy is violated it's your own fault for not being more private? Isn't that what we (rightly) eviscerate the GamerGate crowd for saying when someone leaks naked pictures of yet another celebrity?
Second: I've been involved in the Gorean community since 2002. I've been involved in Drupal since 2005. It took until late 2016 for anyone to realize I was in both. Moreover, from what I understand from the CWG the first "leak" was someone on that alt-lifestyle private forum who found my account there, screenshotted it, and started passing it around. I'd say I've done as good a job of "hiding" or, as I see it, keeping these aspects of my life as separate as can be expected without being dishonest with myself and others.
But again, that presupposes that I need to hide. That presupposes "you are an evil and bad person, but that was OK as long as we didn’t know it."
Tell my gay brother that he needs to do a better job of hiding being gay. Tell my Iraqi friend that she needs to do a better job of hiding being from Iraq. Tell them that it's their fault if someone decides they're not welcome because they didn't hide their nature or beliefs well enough.
A couple of people have fixated on the low number of women speaking in the PHP track for DrupalCon in the past year, the track for which I am (was) one of the two chairs, as "proof" that I am trying to exclude women. I acknowledged the poor female speaker ratio in that track in my previous post. However, as noted in public responses by my former co-chairs, by women speakers in the PHP community, and by a former DrupalCon content team lead:
- Session selection is a collaborative process involving 2-3 chairs per track, and reviewed by the entire 20-odd person selection committee. The ability for any one person to exclude a class of people is tiny.
- Extremely few women submit sessions for the PHP track in the first place. For Baltimore, there were zero.
- A key goal for the PHP track is to bring in speakers from outside the Drupal community, so that is where we've always focused our session recruiting efforts.
- I and others have reached out to women in the PHP community who I know are excellent speakers to invite them to submit sessions. Most decline to even submit.
- The number one reason given is that DrupalCon doesn't cover speaker travel costs (most PHP conferences do), which makes the conference cost-prohibitive. That is one of the reasons I have repeatedly raised the issue of speaker travel costs with the DrupalCon leadership team.
- There was some internal discussion amongst the content team about having a special travel fund to help "diverse" speakers (non-white-males, basically) attend the conference. I supported that move.
Remember that I was also a global track chair for the Core Conversations track from 2011 through 2016. I went back to check the DrupalCon sites to see how many sessions had a woman speaking. (In case there were multiple speakers I counted if any one of them was a woman; several sessions were more than one woman, others included both men and women. I excluded the regular "Dries Q&A" session even if a woman was listed as a co-presenter, since it was usually either Dries or a committer panel. I counted that as a Core Conversation session, however.) Here's what I found:
- DrupalCon New Orleans 2016: 4/13 sessions
- DrupalCon Los Angeles 2015: 5/13 sessions
- DrupalCon Barcelona 2015: 5/13 sessions
- DrupalCon Amsterdam 2014: 4/12 sessions
- DrupalCon Austin 2014: 2/13 sessions
- DrupalCon Prague 2013: 4/13 sessions
- DrupalCon Portland 2013: 5/13 sessions
With one exception, very consistently about 1/3 of sessions were presented by women. Compare that to the general attendance of DrupalCon, which is usually around 20% women. That is, women made up a larger percentage of speakers in my track than attendees generally.
If my goal were to exclude women from speaking, I did a really shitty job of it. (Tip: No, I never had any such goal; quite the opposite.)
After my last post, both Dries and Megan have issued public statements defending their positions and asserting that there are "reasons" for their actions, which they stand by, but can't discuss due to privacy concerns. This has led to several people to speculate that there must be some more nefarious action on my part that is being covered up, some even telling me directly to "do the honorable thing and come clean." Some have even accused me of "omitting details".
Frankly, if I had any idea what they were talking about I would address it.
As part of the Board review of my DrupalCon dismissal I was provided with the same Board packet that Board members received. That included all of the information that the CWG provided to the Board, and I was and given the opportunity to respond to it in writing, which I did at length. (The injustice of being forced to justify your private life to group of colleagues is a topic for another time.)
The information I was provided with consisted of:
- A screencap of a post I made on the aforementioned private form 7 years ago, at a wedding after-ceremony for D/s friends for a group of D/s attendees.
- A copy of a statement I made to the CWG regarding the laws in various jurisdictions regarding blackmail, harassment, etc. that I believed were being violated
- A number of reports and emails the CWG had received, all of them stating issue with things I had written elsewhere, but not actions I had taken. All names but mine were redacted.
- Excerpts (usually portions of longer posts presented without context) from various other posts I'd made on the private forum, along with "commentary" from the reporter.
- Excerpts from my dating profile site, mixing my text with that of the site, along with "commentary" from the reporter.
- A link to a Meetup event where I had people over to my house for dinner.
- A link to a different alt-lifestyle forum where I'd not been active in 2 years that, I had not realized, has publicly-listed profiles.
- Observations that I do things like say "Be well" or shoulder-applaud in public
If there is more, I don't know about it. Of note: None of the above is about any actions I've taken against anyone. At no point have I harassed, abused, coerced, or otherwise harmed anyone I've met or worked with. The CWG's statement just this week stated "[w]e initially found that there were no Code of Conduct violations by Larry", and nothing I have seen or received from them since has stated otherwise.
If there were some other "secret" evil action of mine, I presume the CWG would know about it, and would have informed me what it was, or even acknowledged its existence. They haven't.
I contacted Dries and Megan Friday morning (24 March) to ask what other information they had, or to confirm there isn't anything I don't know about. As of the time this was published, they have not responded.
If there is anyone that feels I have wronged them, harmed them, or otherwise mistreated them, no one has told me about it, even anonymized.
Quite frankly, for Dries and Megan to imply that I've violated someone or something in some way without saying what, just giving vague suggestions of "privacy", is borderline libelous. The only privacy that has been or is at risk of being damaged is my own.
In fact, as other commenters have pointed out Dries' and Megan's posts are contradictory. Per Dries:
"he holds views that are in opposition with the values of the Drupal project."
Yet per Megan:
"We want to be clear that the decision to remove Larry's DrupalCon session and track chair role was not because of his private life or personal beliefs.... Our decision was based on confidential information conveyed in private by many sources."
So... which is it? Dries wants me out of Drupal because of my "values", while Megan wants me out of DrupalCon because of, er, something else that she won't say but is so bad we won't even tell Larry what it is? That doesn't compute.
Fear of Gor
Rather, as far as I have seen the issue is not about anything I've done, because I've done nothing. It's a fear of what I may think, because of my association with the Gorean community.
Insert comments about "guilt by association" here.
As I noted before, Gor is a science fiction series. Most of the information online is total crap. There are many people that roleplay Gor on Second Life and elsewhere, so information online tends to be a mismash of role play sites, book indexes, or stuff written by non-Goreans talking about Goreans.
As far as philosophy goes, the books are argument by hyperbole and parable. No one rational takes them as a precise prescription for how to organize a society, including the author. Even in the fictional world of the books, only a very small minority of the population are slaves.
You'll also find the occasional "safari piece" about Gor from some online publication, where the author decides to find some crackpot abuser who throws Gorean terms around and use that as a jumping off point to point at the weirdos in the corner to show how enlightened he and the reader are for not being like them.
Yes, there are crackpot abusers who call themselves Gorean. The problem is not that they call themselves Gorean, but the fact that they're abusers. There are also Muslim terrorists in the world. The problem being that they are "terrorists", not "Muslim". There's also Baptist abusers, but we don't say all Baptists are therefore abusers.
The most common concern I have seen is that there is no consent in a Gorean relationship, which is a blatant falsehood. All of the parties consent. If someone no longer consents then the relationship ends. The difference with Gor is that the consent being given is for one partner to lead and the other take a supporting role. When disagreements happen, they're consenting to address them in a respectful, adult manner. Consent and communication are cornerstones of any healthy relationship, Gorean or otherwise.
Of course, in all of this few people who want me out have bothered to actually, you know, ask me what my beliefs are. They're extrapolating based on fragments they read out of context, provided by someone who is trying to blackmail me, without actually asking me for input or clarification or explanation. Klaus did, but chose not to listen, and instead yelled at me that I'm abusing people he's never met. As I mentioned above, a few people have reached out to me privately to ask for clarification in the last few days, and I'd like to think they came away satisfied with my answers.
So, let's go there. What are these supposedly evil things Larry believes?
Larry, do you really think women are inferior to men?
No, I do not.
Larry, do you really think all women are supposed to serve men as slaves?
No, I do not.
Do you believe it's wrong for a woman to have authority over a man?
No, I do not. You're quoting the Christian Bible, not me.
I voted for women for President, Senate, Congress, and State House in the last US election, and not for the first time.
I've spent a majority of my career working for women, directly or indirectly. Many projects I've been involved with had women as tech leads. I had no issue.
But don't the Gor books say lots of anti-women things?
Yes, the do. They're argument by hyperbole, not to be taken literally. Even the author says as much.
The Torah, Bible, and Quran say lots of anti-women things, too. Most followers of those books don’t take them literally either. There are religious people who are misogynist pigs. Yet it wouldn't even occur to us to exclude someone who says "I'm a Christian", unless they personally took actions that were abusive or derogatory.
But, you said slave!
Yes, I did. Consensual power exchange communities, at least in the US, have been using the terms “Master” and “slave” for more than twice as long as I've been alive. I didn't pick it.
No, there is not even a little bit of similarity between consensual power exchange relationships and the horrific abuse that unfortunately still happens in too much of the world today.
"Slavery", as the word is used by Goreans and others in M/s relationships is, from a legal perspective, a consensual simulation at best. It's a cultural affectation. There is no actual coercion or force involved. In the ideal case it is a deeply loving, symbiotic relationship, not an exploitive one.
So wait, what do you believe?
I believe there are no significant differences between populations or genders relating to aptitude. I put no stock whatsoever in "girls can't do X" type statements, especially in tech. I have worked with far too many damned good women software developers and managers to believe otherwise.
I believe everyone deserves equal treatment under the law, and from their employers and co-workers. And that treatment had damned well better be respectful and supportive.
I believe that no statement about human nature is universal. Humans are just too complicated a species.
I believe that diverse collaborative groups are better than monocultural ones. That is, diverse along many axes: sex, race, age, educational background, religious background (or lack thereof), sexual orientation, family status, relationship status... anything that affects a person's experiences and/or thought processes.
I believe that as long as a relationship is entered into, and maintained, with informed consent from all parties to all activities in the relationship, it is by default morally acceptable. I may not be interested in it, I may be made uncomfortable by it, I may not like it, but it's not my place to call it "wrong". Nor is it yours.
I believe that a relationship that lacks the informed consent from all parties is by default morally unacceptable.
I believe that human psychology is shaped in part by evolution, and that does impact the sexes. Men and women have, on average, differences in their neurology that can impact personality. (For information on how this affects children, it has been suggested Boys by Daniel J. Hodgins is a good resource.) These are averages, and trends across a population only and say nothing about an individual person. For example, men are, on average, taller than women but there are men and women of almost every conceivable height. Men, on average, have greater upper body strength that women yet there are plenty of women that could easily bench-press me.
I believe if I wish to discuss a fictional book series, philosophy, unconventional relationships, or whatever else with friends and acquaintances on a forum dedicated to that purpose, I have the right to do so without prejudice and discrimination. And so do you.
I believe that everyone should strive to reach their full potential and maximize whatever skills they have, regardless of their background. I believe it is my duty as a fellow human being to help others do so to the extent I am able. I believe this statement to be a very Gorean attitude.
I believe that full potential is different for different people, and in different areas. People are not all equal in skill, aptitude, inclination, or desire. That's OK. (There are plenty of areas where my skills are not even worth mentioning.) Everyone still deserves the right to try and reach and to improve and better themselves.
I believe that those differences in skill do not correlate to any of the usual things people try to discriminate on, and it's asinine to try and use them as justification for discrimination.
I believe the above statements to be fully compatible with identifying as Gorean.
I believe none of the above is contradictory with Drupal's published values, or unstated values.
I have seen a few people argue that matters like this are why Codes of Conduct are bad. I disagree. It's not the Code of Conduct that's being used against me. In fact, the CWG has stated publicly that I have not violated the CoC.
I took a while to warm up to CoCs, I admit, but at this point I am largely in favor of them, as long as they're well-written. Like any other tool they can be done well or poorly and used for good or ill, but by and large I support them. Drupal's is pretty good. Please do not use this situation as an argument against CoCs, as I do not believe that is accurate.
I've also seen a few people tweet that they're going to look elsewhere for CMS software. Please don't do that just on my account. Drupal is still a solid piece of web software, as much as it was a week ago. Based on the messages and tweets I've gotten, most of the community is just as horrified at this situation as I am.
To those who have reached out to me in public or in private to offer their support and to say "be well", I thank you. Be well, Drupal.
Hi, it's interesting you mention Daniel J Hodgins, I found a review of his work here.
More (better) sources
Hello, I am the early childhood teacher with 11 years teaching experience who shared the book by Daniel Hodgins with Larry. I have never heard or seen him speak, but I have read his works. The article you linked to shares a reflection about presentations he gave in 2007. The book was published in 2009 and does not include the controversial information from the article. But to set him aside as a resource, here are a few other sources for the differences in early childhood development between boys and girls.
“The experts agree: Boys are more physically aggressive than girls (Archer & Cote, 2005; Underwood, 2003) … This difference—the result, perhaps, of the male sex hormones bathing a boy’s fetal brain—persists throughout childhood (Broidy et al., 2003)” (Kaiser & Rasminsky, 2012, p. 20).
“These biologically related differences would then contribute to gender differences in behavior. For example, boys have been shown to have higher levels of arousal than girls in infancy and boys show less language ability and inhibitory control than girls in early childhood (see Brody, 1999). These early gender differences have been found to be strongly influenced by biological factors, such as sex differences in gene expression and the influence of sex hormones (e.g., testosterone) in utero, which lead to brain and body differences between boys and girls (for reviews, see Baron-Cohen, 2002; or Zahn-Waxler et al., 2008). Boys’ lower language and inhibitory control abilities may then lead to difficulty inhibiting the expression of several behaviors, including negative emotions, lower likelihood of using language to regulate emotion expressions, and greater likelihood of expressing un-modulated negative emotions” (Chaplin, 2015).
“Significantly more males than females had language delay (Communication scale) at age 1, 2 and 3 years (p-values less than or equal to 0.01). Males were also more likely to be classified as delayed on the Fine-Motor (p = 0.04) and Personal-Social (p less than 0.01) scales at age 3 years. Chi-square analyses found a significant difference between BioT quartiles in the rate of language delay (but not Fine-Motor and Personal-Social delay) for males (age 3) and females (age 1 and 3). Generalized estimating equations, incorporating a range of sociodemographic and obstetric variables, found that males in the highest BioT quartile were at increased risk for a clinically significant language delay during the first 3 years of life, with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.47 (95% CI: 1.12, 5.47). By contrast, increasing levels of BioT reduced the risk of language delay among females (Quartile 2: OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.09, 0.59; Quartile 4: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.99). Conclusion: These data suggest that high prenatal testosterone levels are a risk factor for language delay in males, but may be a protective factor for females” (Whitehouse, Mattes, Maybery, Sawyer, Jacoby, Keelan, & Hickey, 2012).
-Archer, J. & Cote, S. (2005). Sex differences in aggressive behavior: A developmental and evolutionary perspective. In R. E. Tremblay, W. W. Hartup, & J. Archer (Eds.), Developmental origins of aggression (pp. 425-443). New York: Guilford.
-Baron-Cohen S. The extreme male brain theory of autism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2002;6:248–254. [PubMed]
-Brody LR. Gender, emotion, and the family. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, MA: 1999.
-Broidy, L. M., Tremblay, R. E., Brame, B., Fergusson, D., Horwood, J. L., aird, R., et al. (2003). Developmental trajectories of childhood disruptive behaviors and adolescent delinquency; A six-Site, cross-national study. Developmental Psychology, 29, 222-245
-Chaplin, T. M. (2015). Gender and Emotion Expression: A Developmental Contextual Perspective. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4469291/
-Kaiser, B., & Rasminsky, J. S. (2012). Challenging Behavior in Young Children: Understanding, Preventing, and Responding Effectively (Third ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
-Underwood, M. K. (2003). Social aggression among girls. New York: Guilford.
-Whitehouse, A. J., Mattes, E., Maybery, M. T., Sawyer, M. G., Jacoby, P., Keelan, J. A., & Hickey, M. (2012). Sex-specific associations between umbilical cord blood testosterone levels and language delay in early childhood. Journal Of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, 53(7), 726-734. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02523.x
-Zahn-Waxler C, Shirtcliff EA, Marceau K. Disorders of childhood and adolescence: Gender and psychopathology. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology. 2008;4:275–303. doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091358. [PubMed]
I have decided to terminate…
I have decided to terminate my Drupal Association membership, and I know many more people that are also doing the same.
Thanks for writing such a…
Thanks for writing such a comprehensive follow-up. Especially the part about the "secret evidence" is important; this was the main question I still had having read the previous communications. Now, the DA and Dries must either accuse you of lying about the matter, or they must acknowledge that they banned you based on evidence that you were not given a chance to respond to. I can't imagine that ever being justifiable.
I haven't been very active in Drupal for several years, but I was still supporting the Drupal Association financially by being a member. I will not be renewing my membership.
First rate communication
This actually answers every question I had wanted to ask you since this scandal boiled over. If nothing else your communication about this has been first-rate, unlike the wishy-washy values/JustTrustUs™ talk from Dries and the DA.
On the available evidence, it appears you are the victim of a grave injustice of career ruining proportions.
While I have much empathy for you, I don't think people looking for a new CMS are doing it on your account but to protect themselves. For example, I'm a communist, are they coming for me next? Aren't there other commies in the Drupal community who might be targeted?
We need to find other CMS's not because Drupal is a bad piece of software but because the dictator is responsible for a witch hunt and the community is imploding.
Speaking broadly I'm not happy with the number of pies Dries has his fingers in; he should step down from some of them, make the community leadership a representative democracy and end the dictatorship.
While I have much empathy…
The Drupal leadership is dismissive of any class-based concerns, often at the expense of the types diversity they desire (class diversity isn't high on that list). Example from the essay: "DrupalCon doesn't cover speaker travel costs" while wanting speakers from a traditionally economically disadvantaged group.
In addition to ignoring class issues (almost) completely, some big names in the community are actively hostile to conversations about money and class and whose voices might be silenced by the status quo. A purge of socialists is not an unreasonable fear in a community dominated by venture capital. Especially after this debacle.
The one thing I learned from this mess: don't let Drupal people find out anything about your politics!
You god damn commie! *shakes…
You god damn commie! *shakes fist ironically*
Im an anarcho-capitalist *shakes hand in a friendly manner*
See how easy it is guys?
I stand with Larry and anyone else against thought police who promote 'diversity' then seek to force people to conform like fascists
MySQL uses "master" and "slave" servers. Clearly this database is not aligned with Drupal's values and should be banned.
We already did that....
We already did that....
I lol'd hard at this one.
I lol'd hard at this one.
There's really no surprise…
There's really no surprise that the mentality that produced such gems such as:
"Replace "master/slave" terminology with "primary/replica"" ( https://www.drupal.org/node/2275877 ) would continue to get so out-of-hand.
Thank you, again, Larry. The courage you've shown to come out like this has been a amazing. I'll get in the long line of Drupal folk writing to say we are so sorry to see this happen in our beloved community. But I realize that your openness has created a (potentially) lopsided narrative.
To the DA and Dries: you have both said there is additional evidence that cannot be shared because of concerns regarding the reporter's privacy. I respect that. But at a minimum, can you name the crime (for lack of a better term) and tell us if it occurred at a Drupal event (or within the community)? I respect and trust both Dries and the DA, but I've lost a lot of that because of what looks a like a witch-hunt. Please help me restore that trust or come clean and say "my bad." I will forgive and I expect Larry would as well...
I honestly spent the entire weekend debating if I was going to buy my plane ticket to DrupalCon in the aftermath of what has happened to you... In the end I did because I support the project and the community. I hope to see you there to offer my support for you in person.
As you like to say, be well.
Sad State of Affairs
I find it abhorrent that your personal life has been dragged out in front of the court of Drupal public opinion and having to live through ridiculous accusations from people who've never met you. It's so ridiculous that people on Reddit have said that it's impossible for you to be a part of a community with specific beliefs and not act upon those or hold those beliefs in other meatspace environments. These people are acting as the judge and jury to proclaim your guilt without knowing a darn thing about you or how you interact with people.
As a woman in the tech industry, I blaze my own path. The people I need the least are those like Klaus who seem to think that foisting their morality into the fray is somehow going to help me... I don't need that kind of help Klaus, thank-you very much. I don't need Klausian white-knights saving me from evildoers.... unless, Klaus, you think I'm too weak and stupid to tell someone "no thank you" to a situation or proposition I'm not comfortable with. I feel like a child when I hear stories about people like Klaus bravely defending people like me on my behalf when he doesn't have a clue about what's going on.
What's transpired between Dries, Megan, Klaus and the CWG has soured my outlook on this community. If your career is in the hands of these so-called moral arbiters, we're all one step away from losing our livelihood. They're hypocrites as they'll never ban someone from Saudi who practices Sharia. They'll never ban a Muslim, Jew, Christian or Hindu. But they clearly will ban someone for having a private life that is no damn business of anyone else.
It's only a matter of time before the witch hunters become the hunted. These people have created a rod for their own backs. I hope that one day they do not feel the sting of that rod.
Thanks for all the amazing work you've done for Drupal and I'm sorry that you are being treated so poorly by the leadership. My opinion of what you do in your personal life is irrelevant. Professionally I've always thought you were one of the biggest assets of the Drupal community and conduct yourself politely and eloquently. I hope this can all be resolved quickly and that Dries will realise he has made a mistake and apologise to you.
You have my support. I'm…
You have my support. I'm curious what if any 'evidence' is going to be made public and what the CWG's position will be, if that evidence is not convincing (and especially if that 'evidence' is not forthcoming/withheld) then I'm afraid my involvement and many others associated with Drupal is simply untenable. From what you've stated - a mix of information pulled completely out of context is not evidence.
There's no shortage of other amazing open source projects out there to contribute to.
Perhaps the CWG's best position here would be simply say "Sorry, we got it wrong."
I support you
Hi Larry, as a fellow Drupalist, I'd like to say that I completely support you, and I'm really sorry this happened. I hope you can be re-instated. Having said that, I do struggle a little bit with the numerous references to writings published elsewhere, which are not publically available. I absolutely, 100% support your right to keep these writings private, but I gotta admit it makes it much harder to defend you to others. I believe in my heart of hearts that if the public was able to read this (supposed) evidence against you, everyone would unanimously agree that your excommunication is indefensible. But without that, it all just boils down to a question of: who you trust more, Larry or Dries? (For the record, I pick Larry on that one).
You handled this situation with poise and grace - which is more than I can say for the CWG.
Oh my… So, you like a…
Oh my… So, you like a fiction that makes you misogynist pig who enslaves women? We certainly live in an interesting world.
Those accusations are absurd.
I love Warhammer 40k myself. Which probably makes me some kind of ultranazi.
But wait, I also actively roleplay a Romulan. That makes me… Some kind of person who thinks that Romulan race is superior to others and hates Vulkans and Federation i guess? Oh my...
I also live in a BDSM switch relationship. So, basically, we are abusing each other, right? Wrong. I would rather hurt myself than hurt her feelings…
As a transgender woman, I saw how behaviour of some people in IT towards you can differ based on your gender. From what I've read from you, I believe you aren't one of those people. And in a private life, It's really just your and your partner's thing as long as there is a mutual consent. And if there is, it doesn't show what kind of person you are in any way. You can be a sub in a relationship and a natural team leader in public.
I understand that someone might have issue about your former roommate. But well, if you discussed that case with two therapists and made sure you aren't unknowingly abusing her, you showed more responsibility about it than many people would. And that makes you a great person (and master :).
I'd like to believe such injustice didn't happen. That there are some reasons for that. But passing the judgement based on your fandom and a "Secret evidence" would make me happy only in some shady Tal Shiar RP stuff. Not here.
Jolan'tru and be well.
Dries, Acquia, and clear conflicts of interest
I mostly agree with what everyone else is saying here, but something still doesn't sit right with me. Who benefits from kicking Crell out of the community? He's clearly demonstrated that he's not a woman hating monster and believes in completely consensual relationships. He may certainly have implicit biases that affect his working relationship with woman and men, but that's no different from the rest of us.
I think it's time to consider the conflict of interest between Dries, Acquia, and Drupal in general. Acquia has raised over $170m and they have over 800 employees. At some point in the near future they will likely have to take on more funding or IPO. In fact they've been discussing an IPO semi-publicly for about 2 years now.
If Klaus, or someone else, approached Dries and said: "Here are all of the details on crells horrid behaviour and ideas, either you take action now or I'll send this to your board, CEO, investors, and make public that you clearly condone his opinions and beliefs." Dries would have to act in a way that was best for his company, shareholders and employees. Possibly legally and even morally if people will lose their jobs because of the outcome.
While this is obviously speculation, there have been numerous incidents of conflicts of interest (albeit minor compared to this) since Dries founded Acquia. Look back at the core developer departures since Acquia was founded and rather than looking at each incident as isolated, consider how Dries/Acquia/Drupal conflict of interest may have affected the situation. In addition, why does Dries still own the trademark on Drupal. Because it's beneficial to Acquia's and it's shareholders.
With the glaring lack of evidence from Dries, I can only assume that his decision is largely affected by his role at Acquia. And the more I think about it the more I'm in disbelief that he's permitted to still own the trademark to Drupal and the drupal.com domain. How nice of him to permit the association use of these trademarks and to only wield his power when it suits his investors and company.
Agreed. Modern Drupal was…
Agreed. Modern Drupal was built from the "core community" and the trademark should be owned by an entity of that community, such as the association.
I would say, except of the Gorean community(never knew about it so far), I have similar beliefs.
If nothing more behind the words you've written here made you banned, then at some point I'll be next in a list...
We support you
Hi Larry, I strongly believe there's a lot more people that support you than are oppose. We should fork Drupal together. I'll send you an email.
I would be up for that as…
I would be up for that as well. The community has started promoting a lot of other toxic behaviors that have kept me from contributing more.
maybe time to band together…
maybe time to band together around BackDrop and see if we can get it caught up with features.
Great info. Never heard about it but will have a look right now.
I see there is an upgrade from Drupal 7.
Thanks and Be Well!
I never heard about Backdrop but it took me less than 15 minutes to find out that this seem to be a very interesting alternative to Drupal.
I have a couple of sites in Drupal 7 and I have been struggling to upgrade one of them to Drupal 8 and been working for 2 months and I am not halfway.
Backdrop seem to have an easier way to upgrade to Backdrop from Drupal 7.
So Larry, why don't you join the Backdrop community?
Let's hope it does not come…
Let's hope it does not come to a fork. It would be problematic, though I dare say it is in the back of everyone's minds. Frustration with the DA over neglect of the support forums (expressed for example in https://www.drupal.org/node/2536122) led to suggestions that some of us who work a lot in the forums should create an alternative. Even that is a lot of work, and it has not yet materialized. On the other hand, the longer the current deafening silence from Dries and DA continues, the more it looks like the writing is on the wall. They are all smart people and surely recognize how dangerous this situation is, so one hopes they are quietly looking at ways to redeem the situation and avoid further damage.
a bit from the Star Trek universe
This whole affair makes me think of the Star Trek Episode "The Drumhead" ( http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/The_Drumhead_(episode) ). One quotation in particular jumps out "You know, there are some words I've known since I was a schoolboy: 'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured... the first thought forbidden... the first freedom denied – chains us all irrevocably.' Those words were uttered by Judge Aaron Satie, as wisdom... and warning. The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged."
Thanks a lot for sharing!
Thanks a lot for sharing all of this very personal information!
It's really hard to swallow, about all of this mess, that such an immensely commendable contributor could have been lost to the Drupal community without any public information whatsoever, if you had let yourself be shamed into silence.
So, again, thank you for your courage! However this pans out, it's obviously a discussion that needed to happen. If you were really banned merely for your private lifestyle, that would be outrageous. (Same if you didn't even hear the "real" charges and weren't permitted to respond to them.)
I saw similar things happen…
I saw similar things happen in Gentoo Linux. It left a horrible taste in my mouth and I want nothing to do with them. Although this may be just projection, it stinks of scapegoating to me. If I had to guess, someone had an axe to grind against you, and by God, they were gonna grind it.
Community leaders are all too happy in many cases (especially if the person happens to be in a minority group that is "expendable" (the aged, BDSM style relationships, mood disorders like depressionl, etc) to jettison someone to keep the peace. It's way easier to clean things up from a PR point of view with some carefully crafted statements that create an atmosphere of ambiguity and serve to focus the blame on the victim. It makes people believe you've done something wrong, and is a very effective tactic unfortunately. It's obvious that this tactic has been used against you; it's used in Gentoo on a regular basis to render summary decisions beyond reproach.
It's reminiscent of Roman mythology; Jupiter hid himself by drawing clouds. Only Juno could see through the clouds and expose his true nature. Unfortunately, only a few people see past the clouds; they just see the PR bluster, and will never know the facts.
As a retired former IT CEO, and as a hobbyist Drupal developer (I do have a PhD in CS), I will tell you this: Fork now! Dries, as much as I admire him, is a captive (Mmm; maybe slave?) of the VCs in Acquia. It is completely untenable for him to continue in his several roles. I know VCs, Dries has sold his souls. No stepping back for him. You assemble an influential group of Core contributors and you present Dries with a choice; either he resigns or you fork. No compromise. If he actually do resign; I have a new suggestion as 'democratic dictator'; Larry!
Larry, Dries' said his main…
Larry, Dries' said his main problem was that you had mixed your Drupal and personal identities, and by extension, I think he was therefore worried that you would bring Drupal into disrepute if he was to back you, and subsequently your private life became public. Or even if it didn't become public, but remained gossip. He'd be seen to have been backing someone whose private life was at odds with the values of the project, and that would have been a breach of trust. I think the mixing of private and Drupal lives comes from using Crell as the user/nick for at least one Gor related public git commit.
The fact that your private life is now public makes it easier for him to U-turn, especially as it looks like the community supports you.
With respect to the DA. Megan and the board also have to be concerned about the appearance of supporting you, and subsequent publicity, but also the protection of women in Drupal. A chief concern for the DA must be that you might discriminate as a track lead. I agree that it's difficult for a track organiser to completely dominate the agenda, but the individual track leads do have the most power over their tracks because they are most knowledgeable. There are things you and the DA could do to further assuage the risk of bias... there could be 3 leads on any track where there was a worry, with two women to one man; session submissions could be anomymised, and I'd argue that they should be in any case; and there could be further reviews on any track where there is a worry that a lead may be biased. I'm not so keen on further reviews - I think there are enough reviews, and if we shouldn't be choosing any track lead who we trust to be consciously fair and unbiased. It's hidden and unconscious bias we need to worry about.
I think that it's possible for the DA to U-turn now too, because the problem is public, but only if they can also find a mechanism that ensures that there's no subtle bias. Perhaps you can suggest more steps for them to take?
Thank you for making explicit your beliefs. If you admit that there's a fundamental difference in psychology between men and women, and it's not caused by developmental environmental difference, then you can claim the same of skin colour. Or 5,000 years of shaping through religious/ethnic grouping. But persuading you that there's no biological basis for domination of one group by another is not something we need to follow up now.
Thanks for being brave enough to talk about this all in public. It must be ghastly. Thanks for everything you've done for us in Drupal. I hope you are ok.
Track chair bias
As far as track chair bias goes:
I do agree with you that it seems to be far more about fear of the appearance of possible bias rather than any actual demonstrated bias. But frankly, fear is a terrible way to make decisions, regardless of the topic.
Just my opinion...
I finally found the "add comment" link, in the previous post I mistakenly used the 'reply' option and to add insult to injury (a bit) that ended up with me replying to someone else ;) This blog is a little confusing to me, not very easy to respond. But... I can imagine that it also keeps the spam away :)
At this time I read pretty much most there is to read. Enough for me to truly form an educated opinion which tries to take on both sides. I'll be honest with you just like you have been honest with the Internet: it also crossed my mind that this could have been an April 1st joke. A horrible one at that, but I do keep the possibility in mind. No offense, just mentioned for context sake because that's honestly how broad I try to approach these things. I blogged about this on my Wordpress outlet and yah... As stated there: we (us people not involved with Drupal) have to base ourselves on one sided stories. Once again, no offense intended, but that's honestly what it is.
I have to base myself on what you said, and what they said.
So here's the thing... "Een kat in het nauw maakt vreemde sprongen". It's a Dutch saying (I put this in because I learned this con artists is Belgian, and although he could be French ... who knows). I don't know the proper translation because I hardly have to use this. Basically: "A corned cat can make strange moves". And that's what we're seeing here I think. I cannot help get the impression that Drupal did not account for some main stream IT media sites such as "El Reg" to carry this story. It's what drew me in.
I commented on their blog, and Discus told me my comment has been flagged as spam. It was a lengthy comment, but most definitely not disrespectful towards anyone. All I pointed out was that Drupal involves around a company, which automatically means that no matter what they say their main goal is revenue. It's a given because that's how companies work, they have to! It's also why I don't bother myself too much with MySQL anymore but all the more so with anything from the Apache foundation or FreeBSD foundation. Note: foundation. They have monetary values, but they try very hard to avoid any conflict of interest by becoming a non-profit organization. Their only goal is the project itself.
Drupal involves around a company, which knows nothing about non-profit. Ergo: by definition their main goal is revenue. It's a given. This isn't just a mere opinion, it's backed up by everything they do right now. Have you seen the latest blog posts? "Lets sing and dance" (literally!) because "for the greater good of the community". "don't leave!".
Even worse: "If you don't agree with the decision, stay and get involved so you can help it won't happen again. If you did agree, involve yourself and show your support".
Only a company looking to safeguard their revenue will try to get it all.
Of course they don't want people to leave, because when people do leave the Drupal (commercial!) community that will really hurt them. How do you tell a company that you don't agree with them? By stopping to buy their products. How can you hurt them even more? By stopping to work for them.
Seriously: in a very strict business-like point of view way Drupal is a lot like free voluntary labor which gets sold through other levels. I may be a bit extreme in this opinion but I compare it to charity organizations where volunteers try to collect money while the board of directors make a royal living out of "working" within that organization.
When I look at Drupals reactions I don't see honestly nor transparency. I see secrecy, inconsistent, incoherent and moderated / filtered responses and most of all I see a company trying to preserve face and revenue.
But seriously: this is why I do not trust companies working around open source projects. There IS a double agenda and when push comes to shove then revenue will be put above any other values, ethics or morals. Even those involving around Open Source itself. Period. That's not bad mouthing, that's simply how economy works. This isn't a project, it's a company you're dealing with.
And I truly believe that most people tend to forget about that: a company. And what makes a company tick?
"This isn't a project, it's a company you're dealing with."
I read far too much of "Acquia being great for the Drupal Community" rather than the reverse... :)
So, you have a certain …
So, you have a certain "taste". OK, I could agree or not with it and nobody should care.
- Are your code or conferences affected by it? I dont think so
- Are Dries decisions driven by something else than your code and contributions? I think so, yes.
Therefore, to hell with Dries and the DA, sorry. Yes, he is the creator, yes he drove it and no, he is not the owner. Drupal is coded by millions of people, so each one of them "owns" it today. That is what happens with open source and the very moment somebody else adds something to your code and you merge it, you do not "own" it anymore. Isnt that clear? ok they could ban your contributions (wouldnt be fair, but so be it) but they cannot ban you from Drupal, right?
My support is with you, stranger (to me). Be well.
How wonderful would it be if people started withdrawing their DA memberships and nobody showed up at DrupalCon Baltimore as a reaction?
We could demand that the people that made this decision against what is stated in the CoC, resigned from their positions in the DA and were expelled and replaced (because they have actually violated the CoC)?
Or how about forking D8 (like D7 has already been forked) and starting a community on GitHub?
I think these sorts of actions would get directly through the thick heads of the current "masters" (oh the irony) of OUR community. They can keep their product (and realize how worthless it is without US) and we can take all our pride and the open source and move somewhere where these sorts of things are not tolerated.
Just my 2c.
lots left out
In attempting to present that you're being booted because you practice kinky sex, you neglect to mention that among BDSMers, Goreans are known to have more than their fare share of misogynist abusers, because it's a "philosophy" that attracts them, and offers little to keep them in check. Yes, folks in kink communities need to be ever-aware of kink-shaming and the like, but many of us know that there are issues of what can count as consent in "24/7" relationships, Gorean relationships and the like. You've said some deeply troubling stuff on public forums (I saw them in the Inc. article which I can't be bothered to find again) about genderqueer folks, for instance. Those comments make you sound like a....well, a Gorean, which isn't compatible with a diverse community any more than Klan members would be. It's anger-making that you are hiding your terrible beliefs behind what is often real discrimination against kinksters.
I'm not sure you really read…
I'm not sure you really read those threads that you refer to, or understood what Larry said. Here's the article you couldn't be bothered to find: http://www.inc.com/sonya-mann/drupal-larry-garfield-gor.html
It references this https://www.drupal.org/node/2275877#comment-8855213 and this https://www.drupal.org/node/752452#comment-2771414 .
I read neither as _deeply_ problematic. The first is a discussion about the computing terminology of 'master/slave', and Larry makes no unreasonable comment. What he says is factually correct but it could be taken through a lens as offensive. The second is an ultimately futile conversation about whether Drupal.org should be asking for Sex, Gender, or 'What you prefer to be called', and why Drupal.org is even asking the question. It's an emotive subject and Larry upset people because he didn't recognise that. But I didn't read into that he was deeply troubling. More that he hadn't been taught about it by folk to whom it did matter. I agree that he didn't then spot that he had misstepped, but neither was he subsequently deliberately offensive.
The latest joint statement…
The latest joint statement by Dries and Megan on d.o. states,
A comment by Christian Meilinger on https://ohthehugemanatee.org/blog/2017/03/30/stay-for-community/ suggests the opposite: that you are manoeuvering for greater influence over Drupal (or, I suppose, some fork thereof).
It would be useful for your vocal supporters to know what outcome you would like from this situation. Some kind of restructuring of Drupal? One in which you would perhaps be willing and even keen to play a key role? Or, as Dries says (if I correctly understand the odd phrase 'drawing down'), a withdrawal from the world of Drupal, perhaps on happier terms than currently prevail?
I am really surprised by all…
I am really surprised by all this. I do not know you personally, and it is true, you are a colourful person.
Now it is mentioned, you do applaud with your one hand on your shoulder. I've seen you do it once. It did strike me as odd, but I didn't care - it was your way of showing respect to the person who just gave a talk, just like anyone slapping his hand on his upper leg as kind of applaud.
As a fellow Belgian, it think it's odd that Dries points out your private way of life as a reason to make you step down. Belgium was one of the first - if not the first- country to legalize same-sex marriage and it was a very controversial voting at the time, it still is today. Of all people, I would think Dries would at least understand your alternative way of life.
I believe it would be a sign of good faith if Dries or CWG would make the 'you can't handle this' crimes you supposedly committed, public - even anonymized. Based on what I have read, you did nothing but respect every single person you met, mentored or talked with.
As for the numbers of the accepted talks of women, why not run some statistical tests? Science to the rescue, or will I be banned as well for my firm believe in statistics ;)
Leadership influence of speaker diversity
For several years now, Larry has attempted to get me and other speakers from under represented demographics to submit to Drupal events.
The first time he asked we had a lengthy discussion about how not funding the travel and lodging expenses is exclusionary and that any serious efforts to increase diversity needs to take into account the lower pay and higher demands on marginalized groups in a competitive industry and systemically oppressive culture.
Since then, every time he asks I check in to see if Drupal has gotten serious about diversity by making any accommodations or putting together any budget to enable marginalized speakers to attend and speak. He always has to tell me no, but that he has been and will continue to make every effort to have these truths heard, understood, and acted on.
I disagree with Larry on any variety of things, but still have zero qualms about calling him a feminist and activist for human rights generally.
Insisting that people without power over a thing are responsible for said thing is both false and super unhelpful.
I'm sorry this happened to you.
In terms of politics, I had always until our current election run, fallen on a leftist spectrum. I was warned by libertarian friends that the left was becoming more militant and less rational--attacking views that they could safely attack and get away with. I dismissed it for a long time. But I see more and more attacks on people not meeting the ever changing liberal norms or perceived norms (how dare you fantasize differently than me?).
Often the attacked are white and male. Easy targets and ones that fellow liberals frequently find little sympathy with. In my own local, liberal community there are times I fear of reprisal for commenting on the hypocrisy of these attacks. As someone who has always been outside the norm, I'm genuinely scared of living in a nation that polices emotions, fantasies, beliefs, and thoughts.
I'm sorry you fell victim to this trend. I'm sorry, too, that Drupal's community directors are hiding behind a statement that twists their actions into a more measured, impersonal, and democratic decision; yet fails to provide anything remotely solid. And I'm bummed by how many people gave them a free pass on that.
If all this is true, I'll be…
If all this is true, I'll be cancelling my membership. That behavior by Drupal is shocking.
You have my full support, and I'm sure many in the community have too. Hold on, because I don't think the last word has been spoken yet. We all need to seriously discuss the values of the Drupal community and I hope we'll see you back soon. Don't give up.
I don't know anything about the Gore novels, though I think I read one years ago. But this post is moving and impressive. I am not active in the community, though I've been working with Drupal for 10 years. I don't know you, but I've read lots of your posts and certainly used your code.
It's clear that you have been abused by the 'community,' and been treated remarkably unfairly. My heart goes out to you. This certainly does not reflect well on Dries and the rest of the community.
Reds under the bed
What a fiasco! Sorry if I have missed this but when Megan says "Our decision was based on confidential information conveyed in private by many sources. Due to the confidential nature of the situation we cannot and will not disclose any information that may harm any members of our community, including Larry." https://www.drupal.org/association/blog/a-statement-from-the-executive-… - does "cannot...disclose" mean cannot make public, or cannot even disclose to Larry? In other words has Larry seen this evidence (if only redacted) by which he has been condemned and been given a right of reply?
You are not alone and…
You are not alone and feminism has gone too far. Take legal action, this needs to be stopped.
You have rights, the same rights as a woman, if a woman would be in this situation, it would be a major outrage about women's rights. I call this is a major outrage about men's rights. I am an angry man, this is signing the end of drupal to me. Lot of people are opening their eyes, sadly upon your situation. But its good, everything happen for a reason.
I have been involved into drupal community 4 years ago, I wrote controversial posts about Views in core if you remember me. We did not worked together but I have always been inspired by you, your vision, and your work. The people who are campaining against you are using the system in a maneer that it cause you troube. You need to fight about this, it has happened to you for a reason, and I think its time to team up against that.
Make it your fight, you are not alone, men's rights is an issue that should concern all of us.
It looks like someone did not like your relationship with your past roommate. Assumed your personality traits and developed a profile without any evidence that showed you did harm to anyone. The Board must re-instate because of their mistake!
I'm not sure that you needed…
I'm not sure that you needed to respond as fully as you did. I really don't need to know this level of detail about your personal life. By arguing that your personal beliefs are inline with some notion of community standards is to say that said standards have the right to police our thoughts.
I understand why you did so, to diffuse the situation, but it really is all besides the point. I've hired a developer who was an Orthodox Jew on a team where women held important roles. That person's belief system never entered into the work sphere; it was kept separate. It would have been immoral, and illegal, if I considered his religious views of women in my hiring decision. It's not my business. The deeper we debate this issue the more we normalize the inclusion of the private in the work space.
It's ironic that the so-called solution to a perceived problem actually creates a new problem.
I wouldn't want the hassle of dealing with lawyers but I'm sure many would support you in legal action. And, sadly, I doubt community rules will change unless there is some price to pay. It is unconscionable, and probably illegal, to make accusations against someone with anonymous source(s) and to not provide detailed information for disciplinary measures. That this is also bad for the community is also true but individual protections are seriously in danger here from anonymous mob rule.