4 ms·

Or they are young? I have been impressed with how many interesting discord communities there are, so I don't get this vitriol.

Shared404 6y ago
I don't have an issue with people using discord. The issue I see comes with claiming to be working towards a "internet owned by everyone", and then promoting a centralized chat service.
- true_religion 6y ago
  I don't really see it as any different from people discussing communism in someones private bar or house, instead of only having such discussions in publicly owned forests. The world they want is an ideal that hasn't been achieved yet. It only makes sense to hobble yourself by not taking advantage of the existing infrastructure if your ideology holds existing infrastructure to be inherently immoral not merely substandard. Private centralized spaces are less than perfect, but they're okay to use while you work to make something better.
  - Shared404 6y ago
    The problem in this specific instance, the infrastructure does exist. It's even possible to set up a Discord/Matrix bridge as well, so you could set up your infrastructure on the FLOSS/Decentralized option, and then still bridge to Discord for those who prefer that. The problem of decentralized/user-controlled communication is adjacent to the problem that this is trying to solve, so it's not even like "We're working on this, it's just not ready yet", they chose to use a centralized option over a decentralized one that is ready. In this specific instance, I would argue that it is immoral to use Discord[0], as it disregards the efforts of a production ready project serving the same goal, in a different space. [0] Perhaps not quite immoral, but pushing that direction. It certainly casts doubt on their actual aspirations. Edit: I would like to thank you for your comment however, as it did make me stop and think for a while, and better consider my position on this topic.

Shared404 6y ago

I don't have an issue with people using discord. The issue I see comes with claiming to be working towards a "internet owned by everyone", and then promoting a centralized chat service.

true_religion 6y ago
I don't really see it as any different from people discussing communism in someones private bar or house, instead of only having such discussions in publicly owned forests. The world they want is an ideal that hasn't been achieved yet. It only makes sense to hobble yourself by not taking advantage of the existing infrastructure if your ideology holds existing infrastructure to be inherently immoral not merely substandard. Private centralized spaces are less than perfect, but they're okay to use while you work to make something better.
- Shared404 6y ago
  The problem in this specific instance, the infrastructure does exist. It's even possible to set up a Discord/Matrix bridge as well, so you could set up your infrastructure on the FLOSS/Decentralized option, and then still bridge to Discord for those who prefer that. The problem of decentralized/user-controlled communication is adjacent to the problem that this is trying to solve, so it's not even like "We're working on this, it's just not ready yet", they chose to use a centralized option over a decentralized one that is ready. In this specific instance, I would argue that it is immoral to use Discord[0], as it disregards the efforts of a production ready project serving the same goal, in a different space. [0] Perhaps not quite immoral, but pushing that direction. It certainly casts doubt on their actual aspirations. Edit: I would like to thank you for your comment however, as it did make me stop and think for a while, and better consider my position on this topic.