NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

Background: Governance Clash and Partial Resignation

• NixOS has an elected Steering Committee (SC) created by a written constitution, and an older moderation team originally self-appointing successors under an RFC.
• Recently the SC took formal authority over approving new moderators and Code of Conduct (CoC) changes.
• A majority of moderators issued a public statement and resigned (or announced plans to withdraw), citing SC “interference” with moderation and attempts to add politically divergent moderators; a couple of moderators remain at least through the current SC election.
• Some commenters note the announcement implies “the” team resigned when only ~70% did, framing it as somewhat dramatic.

Overhead, Governance, and Accountability

• One camp sees this as necessary evolution: large projects inevitably accumulate governance and “overhead”; elected leadership aligning all teams (including moderation) under one structure is viewed as reducing arbitrary power.
• Others see the whole apparatus—constitution, SC, formal teams—as unnecessary political baggage for a package manager/distro.

Critiques of the Moderation Team

• Multiple commenters report a long‑running perception of political bias: right‑leaning, “anti‑woke” or gender‑critical views allegedly drew harsh moderation, up to permanent bans, while others received lighter treatment.
• The CoC is described by critics as vague and selectively enforced to create an ideological echo chamber.
• Specific complaints include: bans related to views on gender in tech, demographic survey discussions, a “steak” avatar, and off‑site writings critical of “wokeism.”
• Some see the moderators’ resistance to SC oversight and their call for SC resignations as evidence they had too much unchecked power.

Defenses of Moderation and Nuanced Views

• Others argue moderation is essential because social and political disputes inevitably spill into technical spaces; any attempt to curb them will be framed as censorship by someone.
• A few stress that adding people because of opposing politics is also wrong; candidate suitability should be primary.
• One experienced moderator notes that moderation is a real skill and warns both against steering committees micromanaging cases and against simplistic “no rules”/“only rules” philosophies.

Community Health, Forks, and User Perception

• Some see the SC’s actions and resignations as a painful but healthy correction; they report the broader Nix community feels “healthier than ever.”
• Others view NixOS as increasingly dominated by virtue‑signaling, governance drama, and the ousting of the project’s original creator, making them reluctant to adopt or contribute.
• There is recurring discussion of forking (e.g., Lix) as an outlet, but practical barriers (ecosystem scale, infra, mindshare) make a clean split hard.
• Several contributors note that for most users who stick to technical channels, the politics has little day‑to‑day impact—though concerns remain about long‑term project stability and culture.