The Python Software Foundation has just suspended one of their most prominent developers... for, I kid you not, finding a classic SNL sketch "genuinely funny".
Not a joke. This is a real thing that is happening.
The Python Developer: Tim Peters
To put all of this in context, it's important to understand the person who the Python Software Foundation just suspended.
Tim Peters won the "Python Distinguished Service Award" in 2017. I'll let the Python Software Foundation tell you how much they absolutely love Tim in their own words:
"Tim's technical contributions to Python are immense as he implemented several modules into the standard library. Some examples include timsort, doctest, and the timeit module. Furthermore, Tim contributed to the Python Cookbook by writing the chapter on algorithms.
Tim also has contributed to the Python community. He wrote the Zen of Python via PEP20 in 2015. He reached approximately one million people via his answers on Stack Over Flow. Moreover, Tim was an active PSF Board Director from 2001 to 2014 meaning that he volunteered on the board for 13 years! Additionally, Tim has contributed to many Python mailing lists and has been known to always contribute in a friendly, funny, and helpful way."
It's hard to imagine a more glowing recommendation for how important a person could be to the world of Python. And this only scratches the surface of Tim Peters' time with Python.
Bear all of that in mind as we look at why the Python Software Foundation just suspended him.
Why Python Suspended Tim
On August 7th, the "Python Software Foundation's Code of Conduct Working Group" recommended a suspension of Tim Peters (which was implemented).
Some of the reasons for the suspension are... pretty wild. I'll list the craziest ones below.
"Defending “reverse racism” and “reverse sexism”, concepts not backed by empirical evidence, which could be seen as deliberate intimidation or creating an exclusionary environment."
This is a common (crazy) rule in the Open Source world. Defending "Reverse Racism" is expressly forbidden in many tech organizations (such as GNOME for example).
What is "Reverse Racism", you ask? It's the idea that "White People" can experience discrimination. If you even suggest that anyone has ever discriminated against a "White Person"... you are defending "Reverse Racism". Which will get you banned from GNOME, Python, and so many other organizations.
Crazy. But true.
What's even more crazy? I could find no example of Tim Peters actually "Defending Reverse Racism" anyway. This appears to be made up entirely, as far as I can tell.
"Using potentially offensive language or slurs, in one case even calling an SNL skit from the 1970s using the same slur “genuinely funny”, which shows a lack of empathy towards other community members."
This, I'm not joking, is an actual, cited reason for the suspension of Tim Peters. That he found an SNL sketch funny.
What is that SNL sketch? The famous "Point, Counter-Point" 1979 sketch staring Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtin. The one where Dan Aykroyd says the phrase, "Jane, you ignorant slut.".
Why is that SNL sketch even being mentioned?
Because there was a Python package named "slut"... which had the name censored. And Tim Peters referenced that package by trying to not say the word itself, but referenced the SNL sketch.
Seriously. That's a bannable offense within Python.
Side note: The Lunduke Journal officially finds that 1979 SNL sketch to be funny.
"Overloading the discussion of the bylaws change (47 out of 177 posts in topic at the time the moderators closed the topic), which created an atmosphere of fear, uncertainty, and doubt, which encouraged increasingly emotional responses from other community members. The later result of the vote showed 81% support for the most controversial of the bylaws changes, which demonstrates the controversy was blown out of proportion."
In short: There was a proposed change to the Python bylaws. Tim Peters -- one of the most prominent Python contributors in existence (according to the Python Software Foundation itself) -- had lots of thoughts about it.
But Tim's opinions were not supported by the board of the Python Software Foundation. And he talked about his opinions more than the "powers that be" wanted him to.
So he was suspended from the project.
Tim Peters was silenced for wrongthink.
The Python Bylaws Change
Let's talk about those proposed changes to the Python bylaws (which were passed and implemented).
There was one change, in particular, which caused most of the discussion:
"Allow for removal of Fellows by a Board vote in response to Code of Conduct violations, removing the need for a vote of the membership"
Up until this point, a "Fellow" of the Python Software Foundation could only be removed by a vote of the Python Foundation membership. A big, public vote of the members.
This bylaw change removed that public vote... Instead allowing any "Python Fellow" to have their "Fellowship" stripped by an "affirmative vote of the majority of the Board of Directors".
Why would this change be needed, you ask?
Well. It takes power away from the public membership of the Python Software Foundation... and moves that power to a small group, who can exercise that power (predominantly) in secret.
Tim Peters objected to this change with 47 total comments or replies in a discussion on the topic. Which, apparently, is too large a number. Tim was, according to Python, too active in a discussion.
And we can't have people being active in discusions, now can we? Especially when those people are not being 100% supportive of those in power.
How many total comments are allowed in a discussion? 46? 35? 20? There does not appear to be a hard limit documented anywhere in the Python "Code of Conduct".
This Feels Familiar
Prominant developers and contributors. Banned or suspended from projects. By people using a "Code of Conduct" as a weapon.
Boy. This sure feels familiar, doesn't it?
Likewise we sure do seem to be having a rash of "Open Source Boards" making moves to centralize power in secret ways.
Many, Many Questions
The Lunduke Journal reached out to everyone involved -- including both Tim Peters and members of the Python Software Foundation -- for comment (and with a number of questions).
No representative of Python responded. Tim Peters, however, did respond. His responses to my questions are included below. In full. And without comment from me.
Full emailed response from Tim Peters:
> Do you feel that the 3 months suspension was justified and reasonable?
No comment at this time. Chris McDonough wrote a detailed blog post that may or may not ;-) closely reflect my view of it all:
https://chrismcdonough.substack.com/p/the-shameful-defenestration-of-tim
> Considering the recent rule change where the Python Board can
> remove members without a public vote, do you anticipate such action being
> taken against you
Not against me, no.
> or others?
Absolutely yes. The discussion of the rule change made that very clear: there are people they want to strip of Fellow status, but it seems these are due to very "local" incidents not known to the larger Python community, and more substantial than run-of-the-mill "somebody posted an offensive word" complaints. While no specifics were revealed, I believed them on these points.
