5 ms·

Defold is Free, meaning that it doesn't cost anything to use and you don't have to pay any royalties. Defold is Open, meaning that it is possible to modify and

by britzl 6y ago

Defold is Free, meaning that it doesn't cost anything to use and you don't have to pay any royalties. Defold is Open, meaning that it is possible to modify and extend. It is actually possible to extend the engine even without source code access thanks to our native extension system.

ddevault 6y ago
>Defold is Open, meaning that it is possible to modify and extend. It is actually possible to extend the engine even without source code access thanks to our native extension system The word for this is "extensible". Please stop repurposing language to capitalize on a brand you aren't rightfully a part of. This is gaslighting. I really want to like and support this project, but you've got to cut this crap out, man. Publishing a source available project is admirable and worthwhile in its own right, be satisfied with that so that we can praise you for it in good faith. How much do you owe to the FOSS community? The least you could do in return is not backstab us. Do the right thing.
- karlp 6y ago
  As someone without a bone in the fight, I find your language quite inflammatory, it's a bit excessive to use "backstab" and "gaslighting" IMO.
  - ddevault 6y ago
    That's what this is. If you don't want to be asked to stop gaslighting people, you shouldn't gaslight people.
    - teraflop 6y ago
      What, in your opinion, does the word "gaslighting" mean?
      - ddevault 6y ago
        Manipulating facts to mislead people into behaviors which serve your self-interests.
        rcxdude 6y ago
        Ironic. 'Gaslighting' is a term which specifically means manipulating someone into doubting their own memory and sanity by constantly contradicting what they have experienced. Co-opting it to mean any kind of misleading language dilutes the original meaning and is attempting to tap into the significant negative connotations of the term.
        ddevault 6y ago
        Behavior which explicitly meets your definition is seen a lot too in openwashing, like claims that the OSD retroactively defined "open source" or that there's never been a consensus on the meaning. But your definition is exceedingly specific, to the point of rendering the term much less useful. Here's the Wikipedia definition given verbatim: > Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment, often evoking in them cognitive dissonance and other changes such as low self-esteem. Using denial, misdirection, contradiction, and misinformation, gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim's beliefs. I think this fits pretty much on the mark.
        rcxdude 6y ago
        I agree that it's often falsely claimed that 'open source' was co-opted, though I suspect this is quite frequently not deliberate, since the term has become so common it seems 'obvious' that it was commonly used before being coined by the OSI (I in general support using the term 'open source' precisely, and I was in support of those calling for the removal of its use to describe this license). But I still think gaslighting is the wrong term to use for doing this (the wiki definition you've given doesn't differ significantly from what I said). revisionism, maybe, and it certainly doesn't match the definition and context in which it was used in your comment above.
- tinco 6y ago
  You are categorically incorrect here. Being open for modification is broader than just being extensible. He's using language correctly, and you're reacting emotionally to this whole situation. Yes it comes close to the open source branding, no it is not the open source branding, they even distance themselves quite clearly right in the header of the page.
  - ddevault 6y ago
    >You are categorically incorrect here. Being open for modification is broader than just being extensible. What does the word "open" have to do with extensibility? Absolutely nothing. You had to phrase this as "open for modification" to make your point, why isn't "open" alone sufficient? My local museum is open from 10 AM to 8 PM daily, at least when COVID-19 is behind us. Does that mean I can bring my own exhibits, or remove the existing ones? No. "Open" alone is fine. "Open source" has a specific meaning. "Free and open" is deliberately cribbing off of the well-known phrase "free and open source". How about this: why is "open and free" less suitable?
    - tinco 6y ago
      I added the "for modification" to reference the open/closed principle of object oriented programming. For many programmers the word open has everything to do with extensibility. "Open and free" sounds like a great suggestion, maybe we could lead with that? Maybe I missed some discussion about that suggestion, I only responded to your remark about the word 'open'.
      - cxr 6y ago
        The typical way to describe this, especially in this sector, would be "royalty-free", right? "Royalty-free shared source game engine" would be about 10x better than either "free and open" or "open and free", which sounds intentionally misleading (even if it's not).
        tinco 6y ago
        No, because the royalty says something whether you have to pay, but what is meant is that it's not just shared source, you're actually allowed to use modify and extend the source, under certain conditions.
mudita 6y ago
The words "free and open" together, especially in this context, lead to a very strong association with free and open source software, so strong that a reader might not even notice the difference and think you're talking about FOSS. Try googling "free and open" and tell me that this choice of words is not misleading after seeing the results.

by britzl 6y ago

ddevault 6y ago

>Defold is Open, meaning that it is possible to modify and extend. It is actually possible to extend the engine even without source code access thanks to our native extension system The word for this is "extensible". Please stop repurposing language to capitalize on a brand you aren't rightfully a part of. This is gaslighting. I really want to like and support this project, but you've got to cut this crap out, man. Publishing a source available project is admirable and worthwhile in its own right, be satisfied with that so that we can praise you for it in good faith. How much do you owe to the FOSS community? The least you could do in return is not backstab us. Do the right thing.

karlp 6y ago
As someone without a bone in the fight, I find your language quite inflammatory, it's a bit excessive to use "backstab" and "gaslighting" IMO.
- ddevault 6y ago
  That's what this is. If you don't want to be asked to stop gaslighting people, you shouldn't gaslight people.
  - teraflop 6y ago
    What, in your opinion, does the word "gaslighting" mean?
    - ddevault 6y ago
      Manipulating facts to mislead people into behaviors which serve your self-interests.
      - rcxdude 6y ago
        Ironic. 'Gaslighting' is a term which specifically means manipulating someone into doubting their own memory and sanity by constantly contradicting what they have experienced. Co-opting it to mean any kind of misleading language dilutes the original meaning and is attempting to tap into the significant negative connotations of the term.
        ddevault 6y ago
        Behavior which explicitly meets your definition is seen a lot too in openwashing, like claims that the OSD retroactively defined "open source" or that there's never been a consensus on the meaning. But your definition is exceedingly specific, to the point of rendering the term much less useful. Here's the Wikipedia definition given verbatim: > Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment, often evoking in them cognitive dissonance and other changes such as low self-esteem. Using denial, misdirection, contradiction, and misinformation, gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim's beliefs. I think this fits pretty much on the mark.
        rcxdude 6y ago
        I agree that it's often falsely claimed that 'open source' was co-opted, though I suspect this is quite frequently not deliberate, since the term has become so common it seems 'obvious' that it was commonly used before being coined by the OSI (I in general support using the term 'open source' precisely, and I was in support of those calling for the removal of its use to describe this license). But I still think gaslighting is the wrong term to use for doing this (the wiki definition you've given doesn't differ significantly from what I said). revisionism, maybe, and it certainly doesn't match the definition and context in which it was used in your comment above.
tinco 6y ago
You are categorically incorrect here. Being open for modification is broader than just being extensible. He's using language correctly, and you're reacting emotionally to this whole situation. Yes it comes close to the open source branding, no it is not the open source branding, they even distance themselves quite clearly right in the header of the page.
- ddevault 6y ago
  >You are categorically incorrect here. Being open for modification is broader than just being extensible. What does the word "open" have to do with extensibility? Absolutely nothing. You had to phrase this as "open for modification" to make your point, why isn't "open" alone sufficient? My local museum is open from 10 AM to 8 PM daily, at least when COVID-19 is behind us. Does that mean I can bring my own exhibits, or remove the existing ones? No. "Open" alone is fine. "Open source" has a specific meaning. "Free and open" is deliberately cribbing off of the well-known phrase "free and open source". How about this: why is "open and free" less suitable?
  - tinco 6y ago
    I added the "for modification" to reference the open/closed principle of object oriented programming. For many programmers the word open has everything to do with extensibility. "Open and free" sounds like a great suggestion, maybe we could lead with that? Maybe I missed some discussion about that suggestion, I only responded to your remark about the word 'open'.
    - cxr 6y ago
      The typical way to describe this, especially in this sector, would be "royalty-free", right? "Royalty-free shared source game engine" would be about 10x better than either "free and open" or "open and free", which sounds intentionally misleading (even if it's not).
      - tinco 6y ago
        No, because the royalty says something whether you have to pay, but what is meant is that it's not just shared source, you're actually allowed to use modify and extend the source, under certain conditions.

mudita 6y ago

The words "free and open" together, especially in this context, lead to a very strong association with free and open source software, so strong that a reader might not even notice the difference and think you're talking about FOSS. Try googling "free and open" and tell me that this choice of words is not misleading after seeing the results.