To anyone criticising their decision for whatever reason; the key lies in the phrase<p><i>The sum of these events make it impossible for Ada Initiative (...)</i><p>To me, this reads that it's not about who has done what etc. But rather that one doesn't want to keep working with a company where an affair like this goes down the way it has. As some agreed before here on HN; github, or rather the participants in this affair acted, or seemed to act, like a bunch of immature teenagers. It's understandable that this irks business partners, <i>as its simply not professional</i> - usually what business is about (Or more often, pretends to be. But that's not too relevant here). Especially when your mission includes social/society topics, like the Ada Initiative.<p>I don't know, maybe it's the Ada Init. acting immature here.<p>Or maybe the whole "echo chamber" around github et al needs to grow up (seriously, usually such FUD, dirty laundry, who-kisses-whom etc. is written about in <i>very</i> low grade magazines, one would assume such are not read by techies/hackers). It would explain why many articles related to that are consistently upvoted (thankfully, they seem to vanish rather fast as well).<p>Or maybe there's a real, general problem of our/this society lying below all that; but I doubt that. (Not that there are no problems at all).<p>But serious discussion about this should go to a social science HN, in my opinion. I would prefer if we all could nudge the scope of HN back to tech stuff (or fields where YC backs startups, since it seems to expand since recently).<p>Cause I'm getting a little fed up with all this excitement and talk about failed social interaction between some other humans, which in contrast to the billions of other similar mishaps on this planet, just happen(ed) to be affiliated with a company whose products are often used around here.