4 ms·
I'm always baffled when I see things like this. The people who are actually creating and sharing being forced out by finger waving moralistic censors who someho
by seneca 6y ago
I'm always baffled when I see things like this. The people who are actually creating and sharing being forced out by finger waving moralistic censors who somehow manage to take over leadership positions is a trope that threatens open source communities. I've abandoned projects already because of this pattern, and have seen many friends do the same.
Watching a community that has stood for freedom be destroyed by petty authoritarians is incredibly depressing, but I think that very freedom and openness is what makes it vulnerable to these manipulations.
It seems a lot of these people exist, and a lot of their supporters do too. I'd be perfectly live-and-let-live, and just stay out of their projects, but it seems like they intentionally move into and hijack existing projects as well. I'd really like to see a clear method of letting these people know they are not welcome in a project without giving up the very freedom and openness they're founded on.
- konjin 6y agoTurns out the only reason why early open source communities were viable is because they had high barriers to entry that were meritocratic. Simply put, we need more barriers at the creation of a group. Openness should be only for people who can contribute something worthwhile. The petty bureaucracy that has killed every major project from Firefox to GTK is not something worthwhile.