15 ms·

Seems like it might be reacting to or fanned to flame by: https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/36604 https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussi

Seems like it might be reacting to or fanned to flame by: https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/36604 https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/36604

Squarex 1y ago
[flagged]
- barbazoo 1y ago
  > Are they really boycotting jews now? Just because they're boycotting someone who happens to be Jewish doesn't necessarily mean they're boycotting them because of it. > Zed just announced that they are taking money from Sequoia Capital, which has a partner, Shaun Maguire, who has recently been publicly and unapologetically Islamophobic. It seems hard to believe that the team didn't know about this, as it was covered in the New York Times. In addition, Maguire has been actively pro-occupation and genocide in Palestine for nearly 2 years. > How can anyone feel like the Code of Conduct means anything at all, when Sequoia is an investor? I'm shocked and surprised at the Zed team for this - I expected much better. Reads like it has more to do with what they said and done in the past which seems reasonable.
  - nicce 1y ago
    Sounds like the timer is on. Right when Zed started to be really good.
  - xdennis 1y ago
    [flagged]
201984 1y ago
No, this fork is at least 6 months old. The first PR is dated February 13th.
- decentrality 1y ago
  This is correct. The fork and the pitchforks are not causally related
FergusArgyll 1y ago
That's not a rug pull, that's a few overly sensitive young 'uns complaining
- MeetingsBrowser 1y ago
  overly sensitive to what?
  - bigstrat2003 1y ago
    "You're doing business with someone whose views I dislike" is not harassment, nor do I believe that the person who opened the issue is arguing in good faith. The world is full of people with whom I disagree (often strongly) on matters of core values, and I work with them civilly because that is what a mature person does. Unless the VC firm starts pushing Zed to insert anti-Muslim propaganda into their product, or harassing the community, there is no reasonable grounds to complain about the CoC.
    - MeetingsBrowser 1y ago
      I don't agree that it is immature or overly sensitive. The issue basically says: > Hey, you look to be doing business with someone who publicly advocates for harming others. Could you explain why and to what extend they are involved? "doing business with someone whose views I dislike" is slightly downplaying the specific view here.
      - samdoesnothing 1y ago
        Yet they post this on Github, which apparently isn't a problem for themselves or the code of conduct despite Microsoft having ties with the Israeli military.
      - zahlman 1y ago
        >The issue basically says: I don't think any of the evidence shown there demonstrates "advocacy for harming others". The narrative on the surely-unbiased-and-objective "genocide.vc" site used as a source there simply isn't supported by the Twitter screencaps it offers. This also isn't at all politely asking "Could you explain why and to what extend they are involved?" It is explicitly stating that the evidenced level of involvement (i.e.: being a business partner of a company funding the project) is already (in the OP's opinion) beyond the pale. Furthermore, a rhetorical question is used to imply that this somehow deprives the Code of Conduct of meaning. Which is absurd, because the project Code of Conduct doesn't even apply to Sequoia Capital, never mind to Shaun Maguire.

Seems like it might be reacting to or fanned to flame by: https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/36604 https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/36604

Squarex 1y ago

[flagged]

barbazoo 1y ago
> Are they really boycotting jews now? Just because they're boycotting someone who happens to be Jewish doesn't necessarily mean they're boycotting them because of it. > Zed just announced that they are taking money from Sequoia Capital, which has a partner, Shaun Maguire, who has recently been publicly and unapologetically Islamophobic. It seems hard to believe that the team didn't know about this, as it was covered in the New York Times. In addition, Maguire has been actively pro-occupation and genocide in Palestine for nearly 2 years. > How can anyone feel like the Code of Conduct means anything at all, when Sequoia is an investor? I'm shocked and surprised at the Zed team for this - I expected much better. Reads like it has more to do with what they said and done in the past which seems reasonable.
- nicce 1y ago
  Sounds like the timer is on. Right when Zed started to be really good.
- xdennis 1y ago
  [flagged]

201984 1y ago

No, this fork is at least 6 months old. The first PR is dated February 13th.

decentrality 1y ago
This is correct. The fork and the pitchforks are not causally related

FergusArgyll 1y ago

That's not a rug pull, that's a few overly sensitive young 'uns complaining

MeetingsBrowser 1y ago
overly sensitive to what?
- bigstrat2003 1y ago
  "You're doing business with someone whose views I dislike" is not harassment, nor do I believe that the person who opened the issue is arguing in good faith. The world is full of people with whom I disagree (often strongly) on matters of core values, and I work with them civilly because that is what a mature person does. Unless the VC firm starts pushing Zed to insert anti-Muslim propaganda into their product, or harassing the community, there is no reasonable grounds to complain about the CoC.
  - MeetingsBrowser 1y ago
    I don't agree that it is immature or overly sensitive. The issue basically says: > Hey, you look to be doing business with someone who publicly advocates for harming others. Could you explain why and to what extend they are involved? "doing business with someone whose views I dislike" is slightly downplaying the specific view here.
    - samdoesnothing 1y ago
      Yet they post this on Github, which apparently isn't a problem for themselves or the code of conduct despite Microsoft having ties with the Israeli military.
    - zahlman 1y ago
      >The issue basically says: I don't think any of the evidence shown there demonstrates "advocacy for harming others". The narrative on the surely-unbiased-and-objective "genocide.vc" site used as a source there simply isn't supported by the Twitter screencaps it offers. This also isn't at all politely asking "Could you explain why and to what extend they are involved?" It is explicitly stating that the evidenced level of involvement (i.e.: being a business partner of a company funding the project) is already (in the OP's opinion) beyond the pale. Furthermore, a rhetorical question is used to imply that this somehow deprives the Code of Conduct of meaning. Which is absurd, because the project Code of Conduct doesn't even apply to Sequoia Capital, never mind to Shaun Maguire.