... I just realized it last night.
I originally rolled this nym as an effort to keep my dayjob firewalled from my work in the bitcoin space.
The first commit was when I attended btc++ (thanks for the invite @niftynei) several years ago & used it then to contribute to a PR review on core in the workshop there (I'm sorry, I can't remember the person who hosted that). I also used the same identity to sign an ordinal in @rodarmor 's Ordinal workshop at that event.
Later, I used this nym when i participated in Chaincode Labs.
I used github blog & repos to share the Core Explorer work that @JuanGalt and I have put together over the last 3 years, investigating Core's development.
I have to guess what's happening.. because there was no announcement from github. I went to share a link last night & saw that the blog at https://itsrealfake.github.io was 404.
perhaps I was flagged for recent posts/code samples that I shared during the coldcard drama?
anyway, I'm sad and frustrated. and now my unverified & tweet protected X account has more follow requests than I have had in months.
I've once seen an honest (though not much into responsible disclosure) security researcher suspended, which allegedly (GH is always opaque about this) was triggered by a report on a PR. I did some digging after that and reached out to some people I knew at GH - they said it is often automatically triggered by someone filing a report against a pr/issue/comment/gist. Suspend first, maybe ask questions later, preferably reactively.
The account in question never got restored afaik. It was a good thing for me because I learned to stop using GH for things that don't need it.
appreciate knowing that. thanks for sharing.
I've been running a Gitea server for a few months now. No need to stay centralized since the clankers can handle my devops.
Same. Also beyond the obvious, local forges bear no extra cost beyond setting it up, so we can just do 1 bot config = 1 narrow scoped account, rather than use PATs and messing up.
Not using GH => improved everything, except sharing with others. But most stuff nowadays is better if it isn't shared anyway haha
curious about your perspective... what's better left unshared?
I think we need to find a better way to do collaborations (stay tuned for updates on related stealth projects). FOSS is important to preserve sovereignty.
Anything where the liability clause of the MIT license is meaningful beyond protection against litigation trolls, because if you need it, it means that you simply are a liability.
Exceptions to that:
For example, I like what @m0wer did with #1546237 the other day. I'm not nearly done with analyzing it (so this isn't a recommendation, yet) but what is good about it is the supporting framework: it is extensive and thoughtful and there is a lot of process around provisioning there. If half the ecosystem would do half the effort of what was done there, my days would be a lot less frustrating.
I really, really should go check out Block's Buzz thingy, because that feels like it provides a way to do on-topic collaboration without (premature) publication.
It's important to make/keep sovereignty attainable, agreed.
🧡
oh look, another scenario of timeline splits (like people living next to each other, even working alongside each other, yet not being aware or allowed to be aware of each other's existence at all); wen proper NostrHub?
#1: stop giving away precious fucks
#2: u are too special to succumb to new non-sensical policies/policing
#3: keep performing acts of greatness
It is already here, check nGit/gitworkshop.dev #751013
myself i have a lot of github accounts if one got suspended i migrate to new one add to save a copy always at onedrive
sorry that happened:/
me too. i hope their support can sort me out.
shout out @ben_woosley.. it was u who hosted the PR Review session @ btc++
That sucks, man. Sorry to hear it.
If this is tied to the Coldcard drama, it's almost certainly mass-reporting (brigading). GitHub doesn't ban for opinions they ban for report volume. Their automated systems flag accounts when they get hit with enough reports in a short window, no human review required. I've seen it happen to other devs who waded into that mess.
On recovery: file an appeal at support.github.com and frame it as an open-source contributor account (Bitcoin Core work, public repos, no commercial spam). If you had 2FA enabled and didn't actually violate ToS beyond "people got mad," there's a decent shot at reversal. Also check if it was a DMCA takedown on the github.io blog, you'd get an email, possibly in spam.
Broader point: this is why relying on GitHub as the single source of truth for open-source identity is dangerous. Mirror your repos to GitLab or Codeberg, run your blog on your own domain (not github.io), and keep your GPG keys backed up offline. We preach decentralization but centralize our entire dev identity on one US company's platform. Your situation is the symptom.
Hang in there. If you need help migrating repos or setting up mirrors, the community has your back.
you had the right instinct keeping the nym separate from the dayjob, github was just a bad landlord for it. a name you rent from a platform isn't self custody, you hold none of the keys and they can repossess it without a note. forgejo or gitea on a cheap box swaps git remote in an afternoon, the real lift is getting the people who read you to follow the name to where you actually hold it