Github staff Jake Boxer disables #GamerGate operation disrespectful nod repository

by
in ask on (#2T3A)
Little background information,

Last night (October 3) Github developer Jake Boxer disabled the GamerGate github repository containing documents for "Operation Disrespectful Nod". Which contained documents for a letter writing campaign to advertisers for the publishers of the game media articles declaring gamers dead just over a month ago. Here's a link to an image of the removal request for if/when the original tweet is eventually removed.

Jake previously voiced his disapproval for intel pulling ads from Gamasutra claiming: "While we wait for @Intel to correct this, here's @leighalexander's fantastic piece that they pulled ads because of ..." original tweet along with "@leighalexander so fucking angry that this happened. thank you so much for the writing and work that you do." original tweet, Backup Image for both.

Note @leighalexander is Leigh Alexander Editor At Large for Gamasutra, author of 'Gamers' don't have to be your audience. 'Gamers' are over.

Reddit is also up in arms over a "rogue" employee being allowed to delete repositories that, to my knowledge, don't violate Githubs terms of service.

So what's the Pipedot's take on this? Is it ok seeing as Github is a private entity, maybe they don't have to host anything they don't want. Maybe it's time to start migrating my personal repos to other services in case electrical diagramming or web development offends someone.

I could be wrong, but isn't Pipdot's code hosted in Github?

Cross posting to SoylentNews

Re: What? (Score: 2, Insightful)

by vanderhoth@pipedot.org on 2014-10-05 18:17 (#2T45)

I apologize for the summary, It was tough for me to balance. I'm pro-Gamer Gate, but I didn't want this to be "about" Gamer Gate. It's tough to separate "Github developer deletes repository of alleged harassment campaign" without going on a huge rant bringing my personal Gamer Gate views into it. I tried to just give the relevant information and evidence that essentially a developer received a tweet and deleted a repo and tried to demonstrate he did this based on his personal agenda rather than based on any real facts that the repo supported a harassment campaign.

The fact that Git developers have and abuse that power is the issue here. I work on a MAJOR government project that's distributed all across the country, open for public use and development, with hundreds of of people working on it. I believe someone pays for it, I'm a just code monkey on the project so I don't know for sure. What's not to say that someone in the private sector doesn't like the competition from a free alternative and wants their for profit project to be the only one or have an edge. They tweet a dev at Github and say my project is a harassment campaign related to Gamer Gate and, without even looking at the contents of the project, Git just deletes it?

It's something we need to be conscious of and prepared for through methods like what you've mentioned and/or by using another central server, maybe setting up our own. It's important in the professional software development space.
Post Comment
Subject
Comment
Captcha
The list face, rainjacket and arm contains how many body parts?