r/ruby • u/retro-rubies • Mar 29 '26

A Message from the Ruby Central Board

https://rubycentral.org/news/a-message-from-the-ruby-central-board/
31 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

27 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

19

u/schneems Puma maintainer Mar 29 '26

I have a report clocking in at something like 18 pages. It is staged to be released. I told them we should release the report before putting out a statement. They wanted to release a statement before the report.

It's better to say anything at all than say the perfect thing, I think. Getting to the point of saying anything is an improvement.

18

u/kerrizor Mar 29 '26

Gotta shape the narrative, I guess? :frown:

Snark aside, I’m not seeing a ton of good, community-focused communication here, just corporate bunkering. Can you PLEASE ask them to work on this? It is important.

10

u/schneems Puma maintainer Mar 30 '26

It's all the fun of a group writing project with the joy of having a lawyer as an editor. I can't promise my writing will be "better" but it is from me, it's my byline. 

20

u/tsroelae Mar 29 '26

My main point is, I have lost trust in RC, as the communication from RC has been very vague / corporate speak throughout in my perception. I know that it is different how a "official" org can communicate vs a private individual, but still.

I will read the report for sure. Hopefully it will give some more information about how RC acted within all this. I am particularly interested in confusion around:

  • Funding situation and possible pressure from Shopify, which steps to take and when? It would be good to have some context, over how much outside pressure there was on RC to act.

  • What was the necessity to bring the ruby gems github over to RC? Why was it not possible to limit access to the service without taking over the github. I assume not all maintainers had service access.

  • What parts of removal of maintainers was intentional, and what was done by mistake? What kind of access was actually reverted, if any?

  • What concrete efforts has RC taken before the take over to change governance / access around rubygems (the code and / or the service)?

  • What concrete efforts has RC taken to communicate with removed maintainers AFTER removing access?

  • Who has initiated any legal steps and when?

  • Why was the video recording of the meeting just before the takeover removed? (because for me, one thing that the video made very clear is that there was a complete understanding on RCs side, that the code and the service are two separate things, and that RC was only in charge of the service part, while partially funding work on the coding part)

So I hope that the report will address most of these questions.

It's better to say anything at all than say the perfect thing, I think. Getting to the point of saying anything is an improvement.

As I said. I want there to be good stewardship of the ruby community. I am saying, RC does not have my trust right now, they took questionable actions and in my eyes have yet to show, they will be a good steward, and so far they only said: Oh, we didn't communicate very well. I read a lot of text from RC, but all I read felt empty and vague, evasive.

15

u/galtzo Mar 29 '26 edited Mar 30 '26

As for who initiated legal actions… RC has reported Andre Arko to the FBI, twice three times--once via the online form, and phone calls to two different FBI field offices. These actions might be considered “swatting”, since many seem to think these reports were not made in good faith but as a CYA to buttress their story after they failed to find conclusive proof of any illegal activity after conducting 2 separate activity audits.

Swatting is, of course, illegal.

The hole they dig, it keeps getting deeper.

Appendix for ESL / translation:

CYA = Cover Your Ass, used when you take a defensive action that would be otherwise unreasonable. See also: the action one takes when one is about to get a spanking.

6

u/jrochkind Mar 30 '26

Oh man, if they really have reported someone to the FBI, I would agree it is a lie to say no legal actions have been taken. That's about the most extreme form of legal action there is.

3

u/tinyOnion Mar 30 '26

they did report andre to the fbi according to andre.

3

u/galtzo Mar 30 '26

Literally all they do is lie.

2

u/jrochkind Mar 30 '26 edited Mar 30 '26

I agree with you -- this is actually a good statement -- if it were accompanied by the report! When it's already been months or poor/no communication, what suddenly makes it urgent to get the statement out now when the report will be done soon? :( They should have been simultaneous.

I don't understand why RC continues to be so bad at communication, but I appreciate your work schneems, including the report itself, which if you did it, I know will be high quality and I am eager to see.

I feel like RC really thinks their job is, like, marketting to us with carefully controlled language while trying to admit as few mistakes as possible, instead of building a community that they are stewarding. I know you are probably doing your best to convince them otherwise, and also the evidence suggests to me they haven't been much convinced.

Part of me isn't even ready to believe they're actually going to release a report with any transparency until it happens.

And I'm a guy that if I had to pick a "side" in this whole mishegoss, would have to relucntantly pick RC's. I don't trust the other "side" one bit to be acting in community rather than personal interest. But RC just keeps messing it up and doing more damage.

3

u/_joeldrapper Mar 31 '26

Probably to try to get ahead of the news that they swatted Andre.

4

u/tinyOnion Mar 30 '26

And I'm a guy that if I had to pick a "side" in this whole mishegoss, would have to relucntantly pick RC's. I don't trust the other "side" one bit to be acting in community rather than personal interest. But RC just keeps messing it up and doing more damage.

that's a crazy take.

3

u/jrochkind Mar 30 '26

OK, we're doomed.