After years in this industry, much of which has been spent traveling and talking to App Makers around the world, I have noticed a disturbing amount of fraud hidden in the complexity of what we do. This has always been true with "copy paste programmers" around, but now I'm starting to hear of whole agencies ripping people off for millions of dollars.
Tempting though it is to publicly shame the people and companies many of us know to be "bad," there are several potential problems with that. It opens you up for legal harassment, but more than that, it doesn't seem to be effective. Dire warnings just don't change people's behavior as much as they should.
It is a much greater challenge to instead list all the people who are not known to be bad, but it is safer from a legal standpoint, and more effective from a psychological standpoint. Fighting the negative by accentuating the positive is the purpose of this list.
Nothing, really. I can try to point to my track record, but if you don't value my opinion of people, this list has limited value to you. The idea here is not that I am some great judge of character, but that I am willing to state publicly my opinions of people. I most certainly do not believe myself to be some arbiter of worthiness.
Really, I would like everyone to make their own list of good people, creating a chain of accountability, as with the global "certificating authority" system. That way we could better notice the holes where people don't appear on anyone's list.
Because I met them, they seemed like good people, and I haven't heard a lot of people who say otherwise. In general, I have been generous when it comes to putting people on the list, but will be just as quick to remove people if I start to get a sense they are not as good as I thought. That's really no different from how this stuff has always worked. It's just more visible.
In that sense, the list is self-regulating. The best way to find out all the ways in which someone is bad is to publicly declare that they are good. Many have called it an honor to be on this list, but it is also an invitation for increased scrutiny. If you are on this list, and you behave badly, I will most likely hear about it, and if I stop being comfortable being associated with you, I will remove you.
It is probably better to never appear on this list, than to be removed.
The most likely reason is that I don't know them well enough to have an opinion about them, or have never met them in person. I have tried to avoid listing "Twitter friends," and I'm sure I have forgotten more people than I can remember. It's impossible to keep this many people in my head at once, and I've been embarrassed more than once at forgetting some pretty important names.
It's also possible I don't know your complete and actual name, or cannot find anywhere you have published that information, and therefore cannot ethically include you. You are always welcome to request an explanation of your own absence by filing an issue, but I will not publicly comment on why specific other people are not on the list.
The least likely reason is that I believe they are unethical, behave unprofessionally, or are bad at their jobs. It doesn't necessarily mean I don't like them as people, but that I would hesitate to work with them. You should be particularly concerned with people who claim, directly or indirectly, to have my endorsement, while not appearing on the list.
In general, no. Being on the list means that I know you, and have no reason to not recommend you, but simply being on the list should not be considered a personal recommendation. The exceptions are names in bold, who are people known well enough (by myself or the community at large) that I would personally vouch for them.
I have tried hard to only use public information, to respect people's privacy, and to keep things as accurate as possible. For example, I might think someone works at Apple, but if they haven't said so publicly, maybe the left Apple, or they don't want people to know where they work. Either way, I'm not trying to out anyone, and if you ever want your name or information removed from the list, I am happy to oblige.
It's not a caveat and it doesn't mean "asshole." The easiest way to explain this is to say that, while I would work with anyone on the list, the names in italics are the people I would expect to argue with a lot. I do not consider this a bad thing, and prize these people dearly, but your working style, and therefore your mileage, may vary.
The public version of the list is built entirely with public information and is intended for copying and distribution. I am absolutely interested in issues and pull requests, yes please. If everyone in the industry had their own copy, the industry would be a better place.