I can see a lot of comments all asking to explain what some see as an incitation or inflammatory or what led me to label the previous discussion as "scary". I'l

I can see a lot of comments all asking to explain what some see as an incitation or inflammatory or what led me to label the previous discussion as "scary". I'll respond here. What's scary is when a developer becomes convinced that a conspiracy has been concocted to brigade and attack their project. I was accused of being an agent of the other side, as were a number of others. All of that happened within that thread. You need only scroll through. After the lead developer's response, I investigated for myself and found GrapheneOS' own Matrix channels hotbeds of this same conspiratorial thinking. Regular purges were done to eliminate anyone remotely critical of the project. It got so bad that the member lists of both projects' Matrix channels were compared and anyone found to be a member of both sent a warning to pick a side or be permabanned. That behavior inside a community is not healthy. I don't think that discourse is healthy. I am all for technical, compassionate criticism of a project. One that allows or leaves a door open to further, good-faith, discussion. USA-RedDragon's critical analysis in this very thread [1] is a great example. No one should use particularly high stakes as an excuse to treat other human beings poorly. Linus Torvalds, once infamous for this sort of behavior, realized it for himself and the rest of us can too. These two projects would be so much stronger if they discussed technical disagreements without going nuclear. I hope that can be done someday but until then these arguments are best done outside Hacker News threads, which are encouraged to foster thoughtful and substantive discussions, not cater to delusory fantasies of paranoia. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=USA-RedDragon https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=USA-RedDragon