HeyJaredWords about Thoughts
I learn interesting things and meet interesting people, and then introduce them to each other.
- Indexed issues, last 90 days
- 22
- Latest publication
- Sep 18, 2026
- Audience
- Checking…
- Earliest in this view
- Aug 6, 2026
Latest issues
The Memo Nobody Sent (opens the original)
Read excerpt
The person who sees a structural problem before the damage is visible pays the full cost of raising it and gets zero credit for the harm that doesn't happen. Prevented harms don't generate transparency reports. The incentive structure guarantees that early warnings don't get sent, or if sent, don't get attributed, or if attributed, destroy the sender.The WindowOpal issue #941 closed in June 2015. A maintainer had been harassed off her own project via a GitHub issue thread that invoked the Contri
The Label That Couldn't Be Answered (opens the original)
Read excerpt
The "creepy" label, applied to lawful off-project conduct, with no falsifiable content, circulated to professional peers rather than authorities, was a Covenant enforcement action run manually. It cost nothing to apply and everything to contest. The Covenant didn't invent anything. It inherited the mechanism and gave it a merge button.The Contributor Covenant's enforcement clause has a particular structure. It covers conduct "outside project spaces," includes "other behaviors which could reasona
The Scene Before the Rules (opens the original)
Read excerpt
The anti-harassment rules that swept through open source after 2010 were written by people who came from a particular social world: Bay Area, LiveJournal-adjacent, poly-friendly, sex-positive. They were not hypocrites reversing their own norms. They were codifying them. The rules reflected the scene that produced them.If you wanted to understand the Contributor Covenant and its siblings, you had to understand the world they emerged from. Not the world of open source writ large (whatever that wou
The Document Nobody Read (opens the original)
Read excerpt
The Contributor Covenant shipped to thousands of projects with antitrust exposure, employment law violations, and defamation channels baked into its structure. Not by design. By accident. The authors were writing what they were feeling. The foundations that adopted it weren't reading for consequences. The maintainers who merged it weren't paid to care. The result was a document that gave competitors a channel to surface each other's employees' off-project conduct, through official processes, wit
The Covenant Years (opens the original)
Read excerpt
It's 2026. The wars are over. The foundations quietly fixed their processes. Some careers were destroyed, some people left tech entirely, and the loudest voices on all sides have moved on to other fights. Now that no one has anything left to gain from the story, here's what actually happened, structurally, and why it took a decade for anyone to say it.This is a four-part series about the Contributor Covenant, the document that became the default code of conduct for open source projects between 2
Publishing over time
Last 90 days. Choose a month to open its work.
Recurring subjects
Named in the text we hold. One piece can cover several.
Audience
No verified audience measurement yet.
About this data
Counts cover the work we have indexed. Tone needs enough text and a confident classification. Excerpts and episode notes are not full articles or transcripts.
Identity or attribution wrong? Suggest a correction.