I'm always surprised when other people are surprised that these centrally controlled third parties have the ability to control access to data that you give them.
Why is it so surprising and upsetting that something like this occurred? I've always taken the approach that data shared to these types of services are, fundamentally, out of my ultimate control - is this not a common viewpoint?
By using GitHub, or any other service for that matter, you're literally giving someone else your data to manage and are at their mercy. Yes, you'd hope that that service would continue to operate and provide value to you but you do have to take steps to make sure that you have alternatives in place should the worst happen.
The real core of it is what is it that make events like these so intensely surprising and personal to those who experience it?
Finally, I'd have to say that GitHub did everything correctly here, they responded quickly, rectified the fault and gave a reasonable answer.
github is somehow advertised as ideal place for open source community.
instant-banning long-term active-user and not telling what was THAT suspicious in his user activity that they have to ban him doesn't seems to match being "open"
in my opinion - active account of long term user should get so many "positive score" in the banning rules that it shouldn't instant-ban him. it couldn't be scenario like "your account had been taken over" - they told him he get into spam filters. he should have been given at least 24 hours to react before hiding all his stuff
but yeah.
nobody should treat github seriously. not anymore.
Comments
I'm always surprised when other people are surprised that these centrally controlled third parties have the ability to control access to data that you give them.
Why is it so surprising and upsetting that something like this occurred? I've always taken the approach that data shared to these types of services are, fundamentally, out of my ultimate control - is this not a common viewpoint?
By using GitHub, or any other service for that matter, you're literally giving someone else your data to manage and are at their mercy. Yes, you'd hope that that service would continue to operate and provide value to you but you do have to take steps to make sure that you have alternatives in place should the worst happen.
The real core of it is what is it that make events like these so intensely surprising and personal to those who experience it?
Finally, I'd have to say that GitHub did everything correctly here, they responded quickly, rectified the fault and gave a reasonable answer.
github is somehow advertised as ideal place for open source community.
instant-banning long-term active-user and not telling what was THAT suspicious in his user activity that they have to ban him doesn't seems to match being "open"
in my opinion - active account of long term user should get so many "positive score" in the banning rules that it shouldn't instant-ban him. it couldn't be scenario like "your account had been taken over" - they told him he get into spam filters. he should have been given at least 24 hours to react before hiding all his stuff
but yeah.
nobody should treat github seriously. not anymore.
However this is not the first time GitHub bans "spammers" by hiding their profiles, repos and comments.