GitHub: Block the Bullies

Background: <a href="http://sheddingbikes.com/posts/1306816425.html" rel="nofollow">http://sheddingbikes.com/posts/1306816425.html</a><p>In all fairness, the guy was being a dick (no pun intended) to Zed. However, Zed should have kept the insults to the troll and left Github, Powerset, Engine Yard, and the Ruby community out.

This is a very good feature, but I am also afraid it will make Zed Shaw and others think that his attempt to out-troll the trolls and multiply internet drama was a force for positive change. "If you throw a big enough temper tantrum and incite a large enough shitstorm, developers will address your concerns" is an unfortunate precedent. The fact that controversy and negativity attracts eyeballs and can trigger improvements is understandable, but it also creates perverse incentives.

I think zed had a reasonable complaint. was he a jerk about it? maybe, but it's a customer's prerogative to complain about a bad experience. github's prompt response to zed has made me a happier (paying) customer. way to go!

Is this due to the recent drama with Zed Shaw being invited to the "DongML" project? Very entertaining as an observer, but very annoying for Zed I'm sure.<p>Sad that they still haven't added a requirement that you accept an invite to become a collaborator, or at least a profile setting on your account that requires that confirmation.

This is GitHub's response to the (killed) article I posted yesterday:<p><a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2601342" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2601342</a>

The implemented solution is impressively elegant. Keep the barrier very low to join another project and provide a mean to block undesirable subsciptions. There is still a possibility for harrasement with multiple projects, but there is a report to staff option now to solve it.<p>These are very smart, efficient and pragmatic solutions. It's also a demonstration of what is meant by "good execution".

It's a logical feature for a site with a social aspect to offer, and I'm surprised github hadn't done so previously. I suppose the audience for the site tends to be mature.<p>Good for Github for going ahead and doing it. I know of some companies who would have dug their heels in and ignored the issue, or stubbornly maintained that it wasn't needed.

I'm glad Zed made this an issue. No one should be harassed like that. Honestly, it made github look very unprofessional. I'm glad they stepped-in and fixed it.

The profile page needs tidy up - if only it split the projects into tbose you collaborate on,and those you are invited to collaborate on. Its just wording, but it makes it clear that being added to a repo you haven't contributed to will not be shown publicly.

Zed just seems to react strongly to anyone who tries to intimidate him. Same deal with all the people called out in the classic Rails post. I don't fault him for it.

I'm surprised that this feature wasn't in there to begin with. All social networking (which is primarily what Github is about - the source control really isn't anything new) should include bilateral confirmation.<p>What they've implemented is adequate, but I'd rather see something much stronger, like active confirmation from both parties before being added to a project.

Ah, the age old enmity between nerds and bullies.

Now Github became a real social network.

convenience and privacy are the issues, github has tried to do a balancing act.

That was fast!

I flagged this.<p>It wasn't submitted to let people know about the feature, it was submitted to stir the pot.

Hello

I think this was a good response to an attention whore.<p>EDIT: I wasn't trolling. Not even a single response?

I wish I could block zedshaw from all of the internet. I wrote a web proxy once which cuts out adverts - I think I could extend it to block zedshaw too. But my proxy is old, and had bugs with some webservers.<p>Maybe a zedblock plugin for firefox would be cool instead?<p>Even better would be to just integrate it into firefox. But then you'd still have to put up with the character whilst using other browsers.<p>Which means a WC3 draft would be more appropriate, so that all of the browsers could implement it. I imagine WHATWG have already got something in the works though. They've been doing a lot of good work with the whole html5 thing.<p>Does it bother anyone else that github appears to be following a Concerned father approach here? I guess it's not that bad. Other internet forums have moderators and such, but github isn't really about the project - but the individual. So I'm not sure how letting other people moderate for you would work within the github garden.<p>&#60;/nonsense&#62;