If Kenneth has been acting in bad faith within the community, that should be brought to light and called out. That said, I can't help but think this blog post swings that hammer way too hard, and then even gets into rumors about other unethical things he has allegedly done without any attribution. The author goes on long enough in this manner so much so that they have to remind the reader "please don't abuse or harass Kenneth!" That's a sign you've swung too hard. I know Kenneth personally, as the blog post mentions, he has mental health issues and while the article rightly points out this is no excuse, it's not the authors place to judge how effectively or not a mental health sufferer is capable of managing their illness.
Again i agree the incidents in question should be called out and I am glad this author has spoken out. But as someone who also suffers from mental illness I am concerned for the extended nature of the post.
Many people manage their conditions without causing this kind of harm, and when they mess up, they make amends, just like the rest of us. If someone can't do that, then as a community, we can have compassion but shouldn't give them power and influence.
I agree totally but at the same time this post goes well beyond the realm of calling out the behavior and into deep rumor and character assasination territory. All of which may also be true but there is simply no need.
>All of which may also be true but there is simply no need.
I don't understand this logic. If all may be true, then there is absolutely a need to alert the community of a prominent member who may be damaging that very community.
There is a need. 30.000 dollar in donations went missing. That is enough information for anyone to stop interacting until they are accounted for.
What isn't needed is personal speculation about how a cheap laptop would suffice, or how taxes can't be that high, or how much documentation should cost, or etc. etc. It's all pretty much irrelevant in light of the fact that 30 grand went missing.
What definitely isn't needed is an insulting analysis of perceived wrong-doing backed by pop-psychology. "Many people manage their conditions without causing this kind of harm..." Yeah, and some don't.
There is a difference between "alerting the community" and writing an opinion piece placing yourself in a victim/martyr role to underline you're really "the good guy" here.
>What isn't needed is personal speculation about how a cheap laptop would suffice
Sure it is. He stated he was going to use the proceeds to buy a laptop to work on this project. A $5,000 dollar laptop is above and beyond what is required to work on this project. There certainly is reason to question this.
>or how taxes can't be that high
It wasn't "that high", it was "most of it." If someone told me they received $30,000 in donations, but $15,000.01 or more went to taxes, I'd be asking questions.
>or how much documentation should cost
$28,000 to write documentation for the next version of this library. No, it should NOT cost that much for the amount of work and resources necessary to complete this particular task.
None of this is reaching; these are very necessary and prudent concerns.
Why is there more reason to question the cost of the laptop specifically than simply questioning the disappearance of $30.000?
Everything the authors states are interpretations of how the author interpreted their interactions; they're allegations.
You don't need allegations to support an already established fact unless you're playing to the people, that is, appealing to sentiment to win them over to a cause.
> None of this is reaching
It isn't, but it also isn't needed to publish those personal misgivings in a populist format. If the 30k is missing, then that's a clear indictment by itself. There's no need to cast aspersions about how the money was used, speculation on mental health issues, or how little other people personally liked someone.
"no need" to get into hearsay, deep character analysis, pleas to please not target this person for harassment since I am being so extensive in my criticism of this person, etc, e.g. what I just wrote above, it should be clear, trust your facts to speak for themselves a little more than you are giving them credit
Based on my reading of many related sorts of threads like this, the problem with trusting the facts to speak for themselves is that people don't read the facts before responding ... as you can see even from this thread.
In practice you do need to provide interpretation of the larger context, otherwise someone else will do it.
Also, if you don't make a plea to not target a person, then you'll be accused of trying to incite others to target that person.
Your terms "hearsay and rumor" appear deliberately chosen to color the more generic phrase "anonymous" or "third-party". As such, I cannot answer your question as I disagree with the characterization.
The way I see it, everyone requires some degree of empathy and consideration in order to build a productive relationship. The considerations made in interacting with Kenneth may be different from those made when interacting with others, but the principle is the same in my opinion.
I’ll also say that I consider Kenneth to be a true friend, and that those considerations are more than worth it. He’s an extremely gifted developer - and more importantly, a truly good person.
If Kenneth has been acting in bad faith within the community, that should be brought to light and called out. That said, I can't help but think this blog post swings that hammer way too hard, and then even gets into rumors about other unethical things he has allegedly done without any attribution. The author goes on long enough in this manner so much so that they have to remind the reader "please don't abuse or harass Kenneth!" That's a sign you've swung too hard. I know Kenneth personally, as the blog post mentions, he has mental health issues and while the article rightly points out this is no excuse, it's not the authors place to judge how effectively or not a mental health sufferer is capable of managing their illness.
Again i agree the incidents in question should be called out and I am glad this author has spoken out. But as someone who also suffers from mental illness I am concerned for the extended nature of the post.