GitHub's Terms of Service compliance

[fwbrasil]

I'm trying to understand how this repository complies with GitHub's policies.

1. GitHub Bullying and Harassment Policy states:

"We do not tolerate... orchestrating disruptive activity in a way that amounts to abuse"

The repository orchestrates a coordinated campaign instructing people to boycott all professional activities, conferences, and software projects. How is this not considered orchestrating harassment?

2. GitHub Acceptable Use Policies prohibit:

"activity that significantly harms other users"

The explicit goal is to "limit the ability of Mr. Pretty... to use their reputations and influence within the industry", essentially preventing someone from earning a living in their field. How does this not constitute significant harm?

3. The same policy prohibits content that:

"is libelous, defamatory, or fraudulent" and "is false, inaccurate, or intentionally deceptive information and likely to adversely affect the public interest"

The repository states as fact that someone "has abused his position... to sexually harass and victimize women" based on "reports" without any formal investigation or due process. How is presenting unverified allegations as established facts not potentially defamatory?

I'm genuinely curious about your interpretation especially considering a UK High Court case (QB-2022-001263, March 2024) where four people who signed this letter:

• Admitted in court they "never had any evidence to support the allegations"
• Accepted the content was defamatory
• Paid damages and gave undertakings not to republish it

[fancellu]

And it has been up for YEARS

[jmodrako]

👍

[littlenag]

👍

[jduey]

I just noticed there's a button to "Report Abuse" to github. So I did that, copying text from this issue. Better chance of resolution than depending on the owners of the repo to change, IMHO.

[fancellu]

I've already reported it

[chrisbeach]

I also reported it. The repo breaks several European regulations, so if you're in the EU please report the following:

• EU Charter of Fundamental Rights - Article 7 Respect for private and family life - Everyone has the right to respect for their private and family life, home and communications. Article 8 – Protection of personal data. Personal data must be processed fairly, for specified purposes, and based on consent or legal grounds. Article 47 – Right to an effective remedy If your rights are violated (e.g., by defamatory content), you have the right to judicial or administrative recourse.

• General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Regulation (EU) 2016/679 - Article 17 (Right to Erasure) "The data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller the erasure of personal data concerning him or her without undue delay" when: The data is no longer necessary; the data has been unlawfully processed; the individual objects to the processing and there are no overriding legitimate grounds.

• Digital Services Act (DSA) – Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 0 Articles 9 16, 17, 20 enforce that GitHub must process expeditiously and remove the content or transparently give a reasoned explanation as to why not. Users must have a way to appeal moderation decisions, and EU member states can issue binding orders to the platform to remove content under defamation or privacy law

Call for sanctions to be taken against the individuals who orchestrated this repo, such that they cannot ever repeat this targeted abuse against Jon, or any other person.

[fwbrasil]

I appreciate the follow ups but can we please keep this ticket focused on its initial scope? I’m hoping the repository curators will be able to address my questions

[fwbrasil]

@bmc I'd appreciate if you could provide some feedback on my questions, even if it's to notify that the curators won't address them. I understand it's a controversial discussion but scrutiny of an open letter seems a natural process and lack of positioning by the curators opens the possibility of arbitrary interpretation. So far, I see no reason to doubt Jon when he says he had no opportunity for defense and didn't even know the allegations before the letter's publication: https://pretty.direct/dueprocess

[fwbrasil]

Hi @travisbrown 👋 I noticed you merged a PR recently in this repo. Could you let us know if there's any possibility of the repository curators addressing my questions? Thank you