4 ms·

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Suckless.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Suckless.org https://lobste.rs/s/kpuj8p/why_i_use_suckless_tools#c_4g2lqi ht

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Suckless.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Suckless.org https://lobste.rs/s/kpuj8p/why_i_use_suckless_tools#c_4g2lqi https://lobste.rs/s/kpuj8p/why_i_use_suckless_tools#c_4g2lqi

southerntofu 5y ago
From following those links (recursively) i get that: - people in their community are concerned with "cultural marxism" (whatever that means is up to interpretation, but that's definitely a marker of alt-right/neonazi newspeak) - their mail server (run by a contributor, not collectively) is called "wolfschanze" which is a direct nazi reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf's_Lair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf's_Lair - someone on a mailing list (i assume a suckless contributor) has a very weird framing of history where hitler is presented as the natural result of a giant international anti-german conspiracy, and finds it strange/bad that someone gets condemned by a tribunal for denying the holocaust, without themself acknowledging the holocaust I would add another example from their repos: https://git.suckless.org/sites/commit/758f429c404dbdd4682c72bb4eacf4b23540a5f6.html https://git.suckless.org/sites/commit/758f429c404dbdd4682c72... > +---- Führerbunker, 2015-07-31 > +(You can guess who's the Führer.) I'm definitely not OK to take part in a community that's OK with such things, even when they're produced by individuals and not as a collective statement. Although i agree comparing torch hikes with nazis is exaggerated.
- forgingahead 5y ago
  This seems like a lot of jumping to conclusions to fit your pre-determined opinion of them. Without derailing the thread, I do think we all need to extend charity to people who have openly declared what their affiliations are not. We shouldn't normalise bad interpretations regardless of our own biases. They have said they're not, so we should take them at face value. Let's now focus on participating to achieve the shared goals of good user-software without bloat, spyware, and other crap that makes up modern technology.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    > They have said they're not, so we should take them at face value. If only it were that simple.
    - forgingahead 5y ago
      I've enjoyed your comments here, and have learned a bunch from them over the years, so I'm honestly surprised by your comment. Are you saying personal interpretation always supersedes direct clarification by the person or group in question? Seems like a lot of what ails modern discourse is simply imagining malicious injury or oppression when we should work on finding commonalities instead of what differences are there.
      - MereInterest 5y ago
        What you are calling direct clarification can instead be deliberate misinformation. Should we consider North Korea to be a democracy because their official name includes "democratic"?
        forgingahead 5y ago
        The opposite can also be true - if I said I met MereInterest in real life and you were behaving badly (shouting at wait staff and so on), and you claimed you were not, who should be believed? If I wanted to slander someone, believing me, the accuser, over you, the accused, is a good way to break societal trust since nothing can be believed any more.
        TeMPOraL 5y ago
        Well, besides the well-known fact that all countries with $adjective in the name aren't really $adjective... ... then yes, as a general principle, we should take people at face value on the Internet, unless there's a clear reason to do otherwise - which could be a reason to confront the person about their statements. Quite a lot of dysfunction in Internet (and increasingly, offline too) discourse comes from "they say X, but what they really mean is Y" pattern of thinking.
- fmajid 5y ago
  Wow, I was unaware of this subtext, thanks for exposing it. Germany has very tough laws against glorifying the Nazi regime, so if they are Germans it’s not just sick humor but deliberate. Though Suckless vs. Poetering seems like a Hitler vs. Stalin evil-fights-evil situation best avoided by giving both a wide berth.
  - FeepingCreature 5y ago
    Germany does not have laws against Nazi jokes.
    - southerntofu 5y ago
      When is a joke a joke and when does it stop being a joke? Alt-right types are famous in their attempt to blur the lines by claiming sarcasm or dark humor. To be clear, that's fine in certain contexts: if you're with people you know well, and with whom you have a mutual understanding of when to understand the exact opposite of what just came out of your mouth. However, when you're doing that with strangers in public, for example on the Internet, you're just sending the wrong message and building a space where such takes are normalized. See also "cultural hegemony".
      - FeepingCreature 5y ago
        I'm just referring to the previous comment. You have to be pretty overt to fall afoul of §130, blurred lines don't count. (It says something about the intelligence of neonazis that the paragraph still finds frequent application.)
- FeepingCreature 5y ago
  > +(You can guess who's the Führer.) To clarify, it's Lennart Poettering. This is a systemd joke in poor taste, but that's all it is.

southerntofu 5y ago

From following those links (recursively) i get that: - people in their community are concerned with "cultural marxism" (whatever that means is up to interpretation, but that's definitely a marker of alt-right/neonazi newspeak) - their mail server (run by a contributor, not collectively) is called "wolfschanze" which is a direct nazi reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf's_Lair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf's_Lair - someone on a mailing list (i assume a suckless contributor) has a very weird framing of history where hitler is presented as the natural result of a giant international anti-german conspiracy, and finds it strange/bad that someone gets condemned by a tribunal for denying the holocaust, without themself acknowledging the holocaust I would add another example from their repos: https://git.suckless.org/sites/commit/758f429c404dbdd4682c72bb4eacf4b23540a5f6.html https://git.suckless.org/sites/commit/758f429c404dbdd4682c72... > +---- Führerbunker, 2015-07-31 > +(You can guess who's the Führer.) I'm definitely not OK to take part in a community that's OK with such things, even when they're produced by individuals and not as a collective statement. Although i agree comparing torch hikes with nazis is exaggerated.

forgingahead 5y ago
This seems like a lot of jumping to conclusions to fit your pre-determined opinion of them. Without derailing the thread, I do think we all need to extend charity to people who have openly declared what their affiliations are not. We shouldn't normalise bad interpretations regardless of our own biases. They have said they're not, so we should take them at face value. Let's now focus on participating to achieve the shared goals of good user-software without bloat, spyware, and other crap that makes up modern technology.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  > They have said they're not, so we should take them at face value. If only it were that simple.
  - forgingahead 5y ago
    I've enjoyed your comments here, and have learned a bunch from them over the years, so I'm honestly surprised by your comment. Are you saying personal interpretation always supersedes direct clarification by the person or group in question? Seems like a lot of what ails modern discourse is simply imagining malicious injury or oppression when we should work on finding commonalities instead of what differences are there.
    - MereInterest 5y ago
      What you are calling direct clarification can instead be deliberate misinformation. Should we consider North Korea to be a democracy because their official name includes "democratic"?
      - forgingahead 5y ago
        The opposite can also be true - if I said I met MereInterest in real life and you were behaving badly (shouting at wait staff and so on), and you claimed you were not, who should be believed? If I wanted to slander someone, believing me, the accuser, over you, the accused, is a good way to break societal trust since nothing can be believed any more.
      - TeMPOraL 5y ago
        Well, besides the well-known fact that all countries with $adjective in the name aren't really $adjective... ... then yes, as a general principle, we should take people at face value on the Internet, unless there's a clear reason to do otherwise - which could be a reason to confront the person about their statements. Quite a lot of dysfunction in Internet (and increasingly, offline too) discourse comes from "they say X, but what they really mean is Y" pattern of thinking.
fmajid 5y ago
Wow, I was unaware of this subtext, thanks for exposing it. Germany has very tough laws against glorifying the Nazi regime, so if they are Germans it’s not just sick humor but deliberate. Though Suckless vs. Poetering seems like a Hitler vs. Stalin evil-fights-evil situation best avoided by giving both a wide berth.
- FeepingCreature 5y ago
  Germany does not have laws against Nazi jokes.
  - southerntofu 5y ago
    When is a joke a joke and when does it stop being a joke? Alt-right types are famous in their attempt to blur the lines by claiming sarcasm or dark humor. To be clear, that's fine in certain contexts: if you're with people you know well, and with whom you have a mutual understanding of when to understand the exact opposite of what just came out of your mouth. However, when you're doing that with strangers in public, for example on the Internet, you're just sending the wrong message and building a space where such takes are normalized. See also "cultural hegemony".
    - FeepingCreature 5y ago
      I'm just referring to the previous comment. You have to be pretty overt to fall afoul of §130, blurred lines don't count. (It says something about the intelligence of neonazis that the paragraph still finds frequent application.)
FeepingCreature 5y ago
> +(You can guess who's the Führer.) To clarify, it's Lennart Poettering. This is a systemd joke in poor taste, but that's all it is.