Bravo

Posted Oct 27, 2025 19:32 UTC (Mon) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
In reply to: Bravo by jhe
Parent article: Python Software Foundation withdraws security-related grant proposal

Here's the thing: An organization like the PSF might have bylaws or policies that are not directly related to language programming. The NSF should not be considering those things when it decides whether or not to fund an organization, just so long as those bylaws or policies don't actually break the law.

Letting a funding agency dictate unrelated aspects of how an organization is run, especially with the threat of having funding clawed back if the agency decides it doesn't like how the organization ended up being run, is much too high a risk. It's a poison pill.

to post comments

Bravo

Posted Oct 27, 2025 20:09 UTC (Mon) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link]

> NSF should not be considering those things when it decides whether or not to fund an organization, just so long as those bylaws or policies don't actually break the law.

Quite a few organizations only officially instituted DEI (and many other "unrelated to the mission") policies because they were effectively required to do in order to receive governmental funding (including tax relief). Those were either a direct requirement of the laws that created said funding, or court decisions that produced binding case law (usually stemming from the "equal protection" clause of the 14th Amendment)

It is not an exaggeration to say that this government represents a complete reversal of literally decades of carefully constructed and *heavily* adjudicated policies. It remains to be seen what the courts will ultimately do, but I am saddened to see so many of my rural neighbors cheering the abrupt end of so many programs that their livelihood (and often, entire way of life) is utterly dependent upon.