Lunduke
News • Science & Tech
GNOME Ousts Elected Board Member in Secret... and Tells Nobody for 2 Months
Secret meetings. No transparency. Total chaos.
July 21, 2024
post photo preview

The chaos at the GNOME Foundation continues, as it is revealed that an elected GNOME Board member was forced out in a secret meeting... held two months ago, but withheld from the public until now.

Chaos and Secrecy within GNOME

As you may remember, GNOME recently announced that they were in dire financial circumstances... followed immediately by the resignation of their Executive Director (who had only been on the job for 9 months, with almost nothing to show for her time).

Now, the GNOME Foundation Board has announced that they have removed one of their recently elected Board Members... in a "Special Meeting"... held on May 17th.

Yet this fact was kept secret until July 17th -- two months later -- when they made the following statement:

 

"The GNOME Foundation Board voted to remove Sonny Piers as a member of the Board of Directors for cause, at a Special Meeting on May 17th, 2024, following the procedure outlined in the GNOME Bylaws, and remove him from all committees. Effective May 25th, 2024, his seat is now vacant, and in accordance with the Bylaws will be filled for the remainder of its term by an appointment made by the Board.

 

A Code of Conduct complaint was also made against Sonny Piers. The Foundation is engaged in a mediation process with him, which is still ongoing and so we are unable to share more information at this time."

 

Sonny Piers, first elected less than a year earlier, was forced out of his seat on the GNOME Board.  Unexpectedly.

Why?  That information is not provided.  In fact the meeting minutes for this May 17th "Special Meeting" are incredibly vague... providing almost zero information.

Almost total secrecy about the reason for this Board Member being forced out of the GNOME Foundation.

 

May 17th, 2024 "Special Meeeting" Minutes

 

This forced removal was not limited to the seat on the GNOME Board... the GNOME accounts of Sonny Piers all have (seemingly) been blocked or banned.  Including source control.

 

The ousted Board Member was even blocked from all source control.

 

Who is Sonny Piers?

There are multiple things which makes this incident extremely peculiar.  Not least of which is the fact that Sonny Piers is one of the most effective and prominent members of the GNOME project: Being the creator and developer of GNOME Workbench, and one of the orchestrators of the 1 Million Euro Sovereign Tech Fund grant from late last year (one of the only pieces of positive news from GNOME in quite some time).

If you were to create a list of the 5 most important, influential, and effective people within GNOME... Sonny Piers would make that list.  Easily.

According to a July 21st statement from Sonny Piers, his ousting from the GNOME Board was a "shock" to him:

"I am no longer a member of the board of directors of the GNOME Foundation since May 2024. The process and decision shocked me. I know people are looking for answers, but I want to protect people involved and the project/foundation. It was never an interpersonal conflict for me."

While we can read between the lines on some of this statement... there are very few details here about what, exactly, transpired.

GNOME Does Damage Control

After this news began to spread within the GNOME world (and after The Lunduke Journal reached out to him for comment), the GNOME Foundation President, Robert McQueen was forced to make a public statement:

"This has also been an unprecedented situation for the Foundation. The Directors have met 15-16 times this year so far already and directed a great deal of time and attention into making this decision and trying to find the least worst outcomes, considering our legal and moral obligations to the community, the staff, and the Foundation — obligations which have sometimes felt in tension."

Least worst outcomes?  Legal and moral obligations?

A secret vote to oust an elected official.  Followed by keeping it a secret from the voters.  How is that a "moral obligation"?

While we're not getting many details from GNOME about why they ousted an elected Board member... the words chosen raise many, many additional questions.

"Regarding the Board decision; whilst the Board did receive a report from the CoCC, removal of a Director is a separate process as set out in the Bylaws and solely at the authority of the Board. The Board considered it separately and independently as we are required to do, and made our own autonomous decision by a significant majority. We took outside legal advice on the situation and the process at multiple points, and it was duly followed. For the purposes of limiting legal liability, that advice also included making the announcement very terse and factual. I appreciate this is at tension with the transparency that the community would hope to see, but Directors are also obligated to look after the Foundation’s legal requirements and financial interests."

We know that the GNOME "Code of Conduct Committee" was involved in some way. 

According to that "Code of Conduct Committee" there were only two "incidents" which were "actionable".  Based on their reporting (which is incredibly vague and secretive), that incident would be one of the two items listed in this report.

 

Code of Conduct Committee Report

 

No names.  No details.  Complete secrecy.

Likewise, outside legal counsel was saught by the GNOME Foundation on whatever this matter was.

And why did the GNOME Foundation keep all of this a secret for two months?  Their statement on the matter seems rather... weak.

 

"Regarding the timing; the previous Board was intentionally refraining from announcements while we made arrangements for mediation mentioned in the announcement. Subsequently during the election period we did not want to appear to be interfering in the election which runs autonomously with its own timeline, and since the election the new board has only had its first official meeting (i.e., duly notified, with quorum, able to make votes) to approve this announcement on Wednesday before GUADEC."

 

To be clear: The GNOME Foundation subverted the votes of the GNOME Foundation Members, by ousting an elected board member (in secret)... and the reason they didn't tell anyone about it for two months is... that they were making "mediation arrangements"?

And they only, just now, felt the need to tell people what they had done... because people would find out anyway at their annual conference (GUADEC)?

Seriously?

I'll be honest here... I don't buy it.  The GNOME statement, quite simply, doesn't hold water.

So Many Questions

These events raise so many questions and concerns regarding the GNOME Foundation.

  1. Why was Sonny Piers ousted from his elected seat on the GNOME Foundation Board?
  2. Why was this action done entirely behind closed doors, with absolutely zero documentation regarding this vote?
  3. Why was this undocumented vote, in this "Special Meeting", kept secret for two months?
  4. Why does GNOME only feel the need to tell people what actions they take, in secret, when their secret activities are on the verge of being discovered?
  5. Why was "legal advice" necessary?
  6. Does the ousting of Sonny Piers have anything to do with the other events happening within GNOME during the same time period (the removal of the "GNOME Shaman" Executive Director, the massive flop of the "5 Year Plan", and the announcement of financial difficulties)?

Will GNOME answer any of these questions?  If their past (and current) dedication to secrecy are any indication... probably not.  Heck.  GNOME bans critical tech journalists from even asking questions in their forums.

Thoughts From Lunduke

If I were a voting member of the GNOME Foundation, I would find this all deeply troubling.

If the GNOME Foundation can get rid of undesirable board members -- 100% in secret, without ever giving justification... and not even telling GNOME voters that they did it for multiple months -- then that means GNOME Members have absolutely no power within the Foundation.  Their votes simply do not matter.

It should be noted that The Lunduke Journal reached out to multiple people with questions and a request for comment on this story, including:

  • The entire GNOME Foundation Board
  • The GNOME Foundation Code of Conduct Committee
  • Sonny Piers

Several hours after reaching out, both Sonny Piers and the GNOME Foundation President posted the statements outlined earlier in this article.  Yet, as of the publishing of this article, not one representative from GNOME has directly responded.  And the public statements failed to answer any of the questions asked above.

GNOME is a critically important suite of software -- used by numerous prominent, consumer-focused, open source operating systems... as well as relied upon by all of the major Linux Enterprise corporations.  What happens to GNOME can have a significant impact on the entire Linux, BSD, and Open Source ecosystem.

The extreme levels of secrecy within the GNOME Foundation -- coupled with their repeated chaos and failures -- raises significant concerns.

The GNOME Chaos Timeline

There's so much going on within GNOME... it can be hard to keep it all straight.

Here is a timeline, covering roughly the last year, of some of the key events discussed within this article (along with some of the other events relating to the GNOME Foundation).

What will happen next?  More chaos, disaster, drama, and secrecy?  We'll find out.

community logo
Join the Lunduke Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
23
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
4Chan Lawyer Says UK Demands Make Good "Bedding for My Pet Hamster"

UK is threatening to block 4Chan in 60 days if it does not comply with OfCom demands. In other news: 4Chan is censoring Lunduke Journal stories & suspending users who post them.

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:17:10
October 14, 2025
The UK Begins Process of Blocking 4Chan in 60 Days

The United Kingdom Office of Communications (Ofcom) has issued a fine to 4Chan. If 4Chan does not pay the fine in 60 days, it can be blocked in the UK.

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:10:08
October 13, 2025
Framework's Discord Moderators Go on Strike over "Fash" Software Support

Volunteer moderators have "taken a hiatus" in response to Framework supporting Omarchy Linux and Hyperland - which Leftists say have "Hitler Particles".

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:24:12
November 22, 2023
The futility of Ad-Blockers

Ads are filling the entirety of the Web -- websites, podcasts, YouTube videos, etc. -- at an increasing rate. Prices for those ad placements are plummeting. Consumers are desperate to use ad-blockers to make the web palatable. Google (and others) are desperate to break and block ad-blockers. All of which results in... more ads and lower pay for creators.

It's a fascinatingly annoying cycle. And there's only one viable way out of it.

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links? Check here:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

The futility of Ad-Blockers
November 21, 2023
openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"

Those in power with openSUSE make it clear they will not allow me anywhere near anything related to the openSUSE project. Ever. For any reason.

Well, that settles that, then! Guess I won't be contributing to openSUSE! 🤣

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links?
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"
September 13, 2023
"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

This episode is free for all to enjoy and share.

Be sure to subscribe here at Lunduke.Locals.com to get all shows & articles (including interviews with other amazing nerds).

"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

Now, let’s take a second to think about this. How can they access your BIOS remotely? Tell me again it isn’t just a back door with a marketing team behind it…

October 14, 2025

Heads up: The “Linux Sucks 2025” livestream planned for October 14 is being bumped out a couple days due to technical hiccups in the streaming setup.

Had streaming issues for the last several days, so makes sense to sort that out before doing a big show.

Updated schedule asap.

17 hours ago

In summary, although tech companies have money. When the AI boom goes bust. Data centers will lose. Like big fiber optic rollouts during the .com bust. Underutilized, sold and used to capacity far later than expected.

Another thought not mentioned in the article. Which I heard in a WSJ podcast and sounds about right. (Linked below the article. And let's just say the commentaror sounds less than manly...) Fiber optics doesn't need line upgrades once laid. It's a one time major capital expense. But data center CPUs will continue going obsolete, with a need for expensive upgrades. Else, they'll be slower than other options later. Which makes for a continual cost, once that time comes when they are being used to capacity.

Also, ordinary consumers do not want to "pay" for AI. That prevents ROI from looking good.

Big tech spending on AI data centers and infrastructure vs the fiber optic buildout during the dot-com boom (& bust) – IEEE ComSoc Technology Blog
...

post photo preview
The Unpublished Anti-Lunduke Hit-Piece
A Tech Journalist interviewed me for a hit-piece article. But the questions made them look bad, and they shelved the story. So I'm publishing their hit-piece for them.

Back in September, shortly after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, I was contacted by a Tech Journalist writing for FossForce.com (a smaller, Open Source focused publication) who was working on an article around Open Source, Antifa, and the Lunduke Journal’s coverage of those topics.

This particular outlet had, several months prior, run an “anti-Lunduke” hit piece without first reaching out for comment — which resulted in their most popular article (at least on social media) in quite some time.

With that in mind, it seemed reasonable that they’d want to repeat that success with another “anti-Lunduke” story.

This time they were doing the responsible thing. They reached out to the subject of the hit-piece article with questions. I like encouraging Tech Journalists when they do actual journalism, so I answered each and every query with easy-to-quote responses.

But, it would appear that the answers they received were not conducive to creating the hit-piece they were hoping for — my guess is they realized their questions made them look like the villain in the story. The villain they, clearly, hoped to portray me as.

They opted to not publish the piece.

So I’m publishing their hit-piece for them.

Below is every question — and every answer (with no edits) — which I was asked, on September 19th, by a Tech Journalist by the name of Christine Hall, writing for FossForce.

Fair warning: This is very, very politically charged.

Enjoy.


September 19th

Hall:

The last time I mentioned you in an article, you castigated me for not reaching out to you beforehand. Well, I’m reaching out now. We’ll see what comes of this.

You do recognize that the vast majority of organizations using the term antifa as a descriptor are not in the least bit terrorist and pose no threat to society -- and indeed, the only threats they might pose to fascist groups are not physical or life-harming?

Lunduke:

Hello Christine! Nice to hear from you!

Many, if not most, of those proclaiming support for Antifa (within Open Source) have also made statements encouraging or supporting violence and discrimination.

Regardless of that fact -- which I have documented extensively in Lunduke Journal coverage -- when violent acts are committed (such as murder, riots, and lynchings) in the name of “Antifa”, to turn around and immediately declare yourself to be “Antifa” is a clear declaration of support of that violence.

Hall:

And why did you feel it necessary to call out Danielle Foré’s [the founder of the elementary OS Linux Distribution] trans status in such an ugly manner?

Lunduke:

There is a noteworthy overlap between “Trans activism” and support for political violence -- including in the recent murder of Charlie Kirk (the murderer’s boyfriend was “Trans”).

In the case of Daniel Fore, he, a leader of an Open Source project, regularly calls for discrimination (and violence) against people he disagrees with -- often in conjunction with his self-declaration as “Trans”.

Thus, his declaration of being “Trans” becomes a part of the overall story.

It is worth noting here that The Lunduke Journal has never -- and would never -- call for discrimination or violence against someone because of how they identify or who they may (or may not) vote for.

This is in stark contrast those, such as Mr. Fore, who consider themselves “Trans” or “Antifa” -- who actively advocate for both discrimination and violence.

Hall:

Mentioning a person’s trans status in ways that are pertinent to your argument necessates rudeness such as calling her a “dude who likes to wear dresses”?

Lunduke:

Dan Fore is, in fact, a dude who likes to wear dresses.

The only reason to view that as a negative is if you view dudes wearing dresses as a negative.

Hall:

I’ll quote you on that, which I’m pretty sure won’t bother you in the least.

Lunduke:

Absolutely! Quote anything I say here. In fact, I suggest quoting absolutely everything I’ve written to you here, today.

Hall:

You also understand, don’t you, that voicing disagreement with an assessment made by POTUS is not only legal but a healthy part of the national dialog.

Lunduke:

Absolutely! Did I say somewhere that it was illegal to disagree with a politician? It seems unlikely that I have ever said that.

Hall:

Also, how would you reply to this:

There have been very few murders linked to individuals associated with Antifa, some incidents of rioting attributed to Antifa supporters, and no credible evidence of lynchings conducted in the name of Antifa. Compared to far-right groups, violence attributed to Antifa is much less frequent and lethal, with only one suspected kill—Aaron Danielson in Portland, by an anti-fascist activist—officially confirmed in recent U.S. history.

Lunduke:

Murder is bad. I am opposed to all murder.

In the context of these discussions, bearing in mind the Kirk murder is important (as many statements were made in response to it). The murderer of Kirk appears to have been pro-Trans and pro-Antifa (based on all available information).

Hall:

Is there any evidence that the suspect was part of an antifa group? I haven’t seen any.

Lunduke:

I have seen some reporting to this effect (including statements from family and messages he wrote).

But, far more important to this story, is the response to the murder among Antifa supporters (including those within Open Source). A large portion of Antifa supporters have celebrated the murder as justified because it killed someone they considered to be a “fascist”.

Hall:

Also, no group should be held responsible for what some deranged person who identifies with the group has done.

Lunduke:

I agree that a broader group should not be held responsible for the actions of a small number of individuals.

However, and this is critically important, it is entirely appropriate to hold people responsible for their own statements and actions.

With that in mind: The overall messaging of Antifa (and Antifa supporters) tends heavily towards violence. Punching, killing, molotov cocktails, etc. are all common messaging used by Antifa (including by those I quote within the Open Source world -- many of whom have advocated violence against myself).

Advocating for violence, then celebrating when violence is committed, are not good things.

Yet we see a great deal of that among Open Source supporters of Antifa.

Read full Article
October 13, 2025
Sale ends in a few hours, Lifetime Subs set up.

Holy moly, you guys are amazing.

A few days ago I published a “50% off” sale for Lunduke Journal subscriptions… and all of you showed up. In a big way.

To everyone who grabbed a Lifetime Subscription over the last few days: All of you are set to full Lifetime access. You should have a confirmation email in your inbox. If not, email me and I’ll make sure you’re setup properly.

That “50% off” sale ends tonight at midnight. So you have a few hours to snag a discounted subscription, if you haven’t already.

A huge thank you to everyone who supports this work. Couldn’t do it without you.

-Lunduke

Read full Article
October 12, 2025
50% Off Lunduke Journal Extended Through Monday (Oct 13th)

Just a quick heads up:

The “50% off every kind of Subscription to The Lunduke Journal” sale has been extended through Monday (October 13th).

So. You know. Grab one at 50% off between now and end of the day on Monday.

To all of you amazing nerds who have picked up a Lifetime Subscription already this weekend: You are awesome. You’ll be receiving a confirmation email, with all of the Lifetime Subscription details, by tomorrow (if you haven’t already).

Oh, and remember how we hit 11 Million views last month? Yeah. We’re well on our way to blowing past those numbers in October.

Wild.

See you all on Monday!

-Lunduke

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals