The Python Steering Council has decided to suspend a core Python developer for three months for alleged Code of Conduct violations.
Citing the recommendation of the Code of Conduct Working Group, Python developer Thomas Wouters revealed on behalf of the Steering Council that the unidentified developer was deemed to have repeatedly violated the Python Software Foundation (PSF) Code of Conduct.
The suspended developer is Tim Peters, who told The Register it was fine to name him but declined to comment – beyond observing that one of his objections to the governance process is the secrecy involved.
The cited objections include the following:
- Making a significant number of posts (47 out of 177) to a discussion of a change to bylaws, "which created an atmosphere of fear, uncertainty, and doubt, which encouraged increasingly emotional responses from other community members."
- "Defending 'reverse racism' and 'reverse sexism', concepts not backed by empirical evidence, which could be seen as deliberate intimidation or creating an exclusionary environment."
- "Using potentially offensive language or slurs, in one case even calling an SNL [Saturday Night Live] skit from the 1970s using the same slur 'genuinely funny', which shows a lack of empathy towards other community members."
- "Making light of sensitive topics like workplace sexual harassment, which could be interpreted as harassment or creating an unwelcoming environment."
- "Casually mentioning scenarios involving sexual abuse, which may be inappropriate or triggering for some audiences."
- "Discussing bans or removals of community members, which may be seen as publishing private information without permission."
- "Dismissing unacceptable behavior of others as a 'neurodivergent' trait, which is problematic because it creates a stereotype that neurodivergent people are hard to interact with and need special treatment.
- "Excessive discussion of controversial topics or past conflicts, which could be seen as sustained disruption of community discussions."
- "Use of potentially offensive terms, even when self-censored or alluded to indirectly."
- "Making assumptions or speculations about other community members’ motivations and/or mental health."
Numerous discussions played a role in this decision.
In one titled "Inclusive communications expectations in Python spaces," Peters pushed back on the notion that "Python old-timers are troglodyte reprobates" and expressed concern about Python's Code of Conduct enforcement process. "I can tell you for a fact that more than just a few PSF members are terrified by the possibility that the CoC WG [Code of Conduct Workgroup] will ruin their careers," he wrote.
I don’t feel comfortable with that kind of power being wielded in that much secrecy
Steering Council member Gregory P Smith answered that proposition by writing: “I recognize that there are some who think that way.”
"It makes me sad,” he added. “But that attitude as phrased is entirely backwards. If a conduct-related enforcement action happens and that 'ruins their career', the responsibility for that lies entirely on them. It was their behavior that got them there in the first place."
Echoing Peters' concern about secrecy, Chris Angeligo countered: "I wish I could 100 percent trust that this was the case. But there is a complete lack of transparency. How can we know that the responsibility truly does lie with that person? At present, what we have is 'trust me, there’s problems, and we need to deal with them, but we can’t say anything.' I don’t feel comfortable with that kind of power being wielded in that much secrecy."
"Codes of conduct can be weaponized just like anything else. Secrecy creates dangerous weapons."
- Under-fire Elon Musk urged to get a grip on X and reality – or resign
- Faulty instructions in Alibaba's T-Head C910 RISC-V CPUs blow away all security
- Anaconda puts the squeeze on data scientists deemed to be terms-of-service violators
- DARPA suggests turning old C code automatically into Rust – using AI, of course
A 2021 academic study from researchers at University of Texas at Austin and Carnegie Mellon University - "Code of Conduct Conversations in Open Source Software Projects on GitHub” - found that codes of conduct are useful to help govern open source software projects, but are not without challenges.
"[A] controversial moderation act is capable of inciting mass community feedback and backlash," the paper states. "Project maintainers balance the tension between disciplining potentially offensive forms of speech and encouraging broad and inclusive participation."
Online toxicity has taken a toll on numerous software projects, as for example occurred in the Perl and Rust communities in 2021.
Judge, jury, and executioners
With regard to Peters' 47 posts, the Python Software Foundation Board proposed three changes to its bylaws. One of these proposals would "allow for removal of [Python] Fellows by a Board vote in response to Code of Conduct violations, removing the need for a vote of the membership."
The issue is that Python Fellows are awarded membership for life and the only mechanism to remove them – if they've been found to have violated the CoC – is seeking a vote from the full Python Community. This is undesirable, because it would "subject members of the community – including people directly impacted by that violator's behavior – to undue distress."
Peters said he supported the proposal in principle but argued for a more stringent test than a simple majority vote.
He was not the only one who expressed reservations about the proposal – which was ultimately adopted.
The Python Software Foundation and the Steering Council did not immediately respond to requests for comment. ®