4 ms·

> If you dont like it, fork it. Stop bothering us about it, we will never fully remove the slur filter. how is that a hostile response exactly? Its a fundament

> If you dont like it, fork it. Stop bothering us about it, we will never fully remove the slur filter. how is that a hostile response exactly? Its a fundamental premise of foss isn't it?

brigandish 4y ago
If I ask you something nicely and you come back with "Stop bothering me about it", how do you think that would come off?
- test098 4y ago
  Like someone exercising free speech?
  - brigandish 4y ago
    Whether someone is exercising their free speech is not relevant to the perception of hostility in a comment, or similar kind of assessment, unless it involves a (at least perceived) threat of imminent danger. That's clearly not the case here so I'm afraid I can't help answer your question, rhetorical or not, as it's missed the point somewhat.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - test098 4y ago
      That was a reference to your line, "It seems that not only has 'community of leftist[s]' given up on free speech (as is the vogue)..." You seem to place quite a bit of value in free speech, yet are bothered when the creators of this project use theirs to set boundaries, going so far as to call it "hostile." It's unfortunate that you find it hostile - I consider the hateful conduct that they're banning much more hostile and support their methods of collaboration to that end.
      - brigandish 4y ago
        I called their responses in the issue thread hostile, which they were. As to the limits of free speech, they're not just limiting what they hear/see, they're deciding to do that for others too. That seems to go against the ideas of free speech and of federation, especially in the open source space. > It's unfortunate that you find it hostile - I consider the hateful conduct that they're banning much more hostile and support their methods of collaboration to that end. It is hostile, but how is their hostility in that case justified by their stance against certain forms of prejudice? I don't see the justification. Moreover, the list of prejudices (if they are, they're just vague assertions at this point) they gave is not necessarily hostile. For example, a racist might publish a paper saying that the IQ of one race is less than another's. That is racist but not hostile. If they were to write "thus we should eliminate them" or "I hate them because of this" or, to a member of that race were to show any sort of aggression for simply being of that race, that would be hostile. It is eminently possible (and I'd say, easy) to be against hostility of any sort discussed here, and against racism while also noting that they're not synonyms and that they don't always overlap. Nuance exists, even when discussing prejudice.
        test098 4y ago
        > As to the limits of free speech, they're not just limiting what they hear/see, they're deciding to do that for others too It's their project, they can do what they please with it. This is the premise of FOSS, which makes no claims as to how maintainers must communicate with collaborators or how projects must be maintained. > go against the ideas of free speech and of federation, especially in the open source space Those are your values, not the values of the maintainers. Maybe their relationship to open source is different than yours. Maybe their idea of free speech is different than yours. This is no more than you forcing your values on them.
        brigandish 4y ago
        > It's their project, they can do what they please with it. Who was questioning that? No one, thanks for noticing. > This is the premise of FOSS, which makes no claims as to how maintainers must communicate with collaborators or how projects must be maintained. It is not, however, any protection against criticism about what they choose to do with that project. If you open source a program that actively harms any or all of the groups the Lemmy project is (ostensibly) trying to protect in its claim, would that protect you from criticism? Not in the slightest. > > go against the ideas of free speech and of federation, especially in the open source space > Those are your values, not the values of the maintainers. Again, thanks for noticing. > Maybe their relationship to open source is different than yours. And? > Maybe their idea of free speech is different than yours. Clearly, it's why I'm criticising them. > This is no more than you forcing your values on them. Pray tell how I have applied force?
- Quarrelsome 4y ago
  > If I ask you something nicely Asking nicely is when you submit a PR as well IMHO.
  - brigandish 4y ago
    As we're discussing a Reddit alternative it seems apt to use the phrase "username checks out". No, asking nicely is not limited to issues that come with a PR.
    - Quarrelsome 4y ago
      I just think if devs are working on smth for free and I want them to add a feature and they tell me they don't want to then complaining about their attitude is a waste of time as well as rather unbecoming. > As we're discussing a Reddit alternative it seems apt to use the phrase "username checks out". and trying to get something for free and then playing victim when you don't is somewhat akin to being a brigand, ain't it? I'm not entirely sure what such username games buy us given we seemingly both embrace negative connotations in our handles.
      - brigandish 4y ago
        Publishing work open source is not magical protection from criticism, nor from requests, especially when using software with an issue tracker that you leave open to anyone. Whether they receive money for it or not is also irrelevant - would their reaction or their decision be better if they earnt a million quid per issue? No, so let's not bother with such facile excuses. Furthermore, I haven't added anything to the project's issue tracker, and I didn't criticise them for turning down a request but the way they reacted to a request. Please try not to create straw man arguments because they're more convenient to rebut than what has actually been written, that's unbecoming.
        Quarrelsome 4y ago
        > would their reaction or their decision be better if they earnt a million quid per issue? No, so let's not bother with such facile excuses. It would be super relevant if they got paid a million per issue by the community because then there would be an expectation of receiving something in exchange. Project maintainers don't owe you anything, the whole point of FOSS is that this doesn't matter because you can just fork it and make your own opinionated changes to circumvent differences of opinion instead of achieving nothing but negativity by hand-wringing over tone. > and I didn't criticise them for turning down a request but the way they reacted to a request. We can tone police the OP of that thread as well if you like. The way the OP effectively says: > this [what currently happens] is just bad > this [what I want] is much more sensible has the same capacity to appear aggressive in nature.

> If you dont like it, fork it. Stop bothering us about it, we will never fully remove the slur filter. how is that a hostile response exactly? Its a fundamental premise of foss isn't it?

brigandish 4y ago

If I ask you something nicely and you come back with "Stop bothering me about it", how do you think that would come off?

test098 4y ago
Like someone exercising free speech?
- brigandish 4y ago
  Whether someone is exercising their free speech is not relevant to the perception of hostility in a comment, or similar kind of assessment, unless it involves a (at least perceived) threat of imminent danger. That's clearly not the case here so I'm afraid I can't help answer your question, rhetorical or not, as it's missed the point somewhat.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - test098 4y ago
    That was a reference to your line, "It seems that not only has 'community of leftist[s]' given up on free speech (as is the vogue)..." You seem to place quite a bit of value in free speech, yet are bothered when the creators of this project use theirs to set boundaries, going so far as to call it "hostile." It's unfortunate that you find it hostile - I consider the hateful conduct that they're banning much more hostile and support their methods of collaboration to that end.
    - brigandish 4y ago
      I called their responses in the issue thread hostile, which they were. As to the limits of free speech, they're not just limiting what they hear/see, they're deciding to do that for others too. That seems to go against the ideas of free speech and of federation, especially in the open source space. > It's unfortunate that you find it hostile - I consider the hateful conduct that they're banning much more hostile and support their methods of collaboration to that end. It is hostile, but how is their hostility in that case justified by their stance against certain forms of prejudice? I don't see the justification. Moreover, the list of prejudices (if they are, they're just vague assertions at this point) they gave is not necessarily hostile. For example, a racist might publish a paper saying that the IQ of one race is less than another's. That is racist but not hostile. If they were to write "thus we should eliminate them" or "I hate them because of this" or, to a member of that race were to show any sort of aggression for simply being of that race, that would be hostile. It is eminently possible (and I'd say, easy) to be against hostility of any sort discussed here, and against racism while also noting that they're not synonyms and that they don't always overlap. Nuance exists, even when discussing prejudice.
      - test098 4y ago
        > As to the limits of free speech, they're not just limiting what they hear/see, they're deciding to do that for others too It's their project, they can do what they please with it. This is the premise of FOSS, which makes no claims as to how maintainers must communicate with collaborators or how projects must be maintained. > go against the ideas of free speech and of federation, especially in the open source space Those are your values, not the values of the maintainers. Maybe their relationship to open source is different than yours. Maybe their idea of free speech is different than yours. This is no more than you forcing your values on them.
        brigandish 4y ago
        > It's their project, they can do what they please with it. Who was questioning that? No one, thanks for noticing. > This is the premise of FOSS, which makes no claims as to how maintainers must communicate with collaborators or how projects must be maintained. It is not, however, any protection against criticism about what they choose to do with that project. If you open source a program that actively harms any or all of the groups the Lemmy project is (ostensibly) trying to protect in its claim, would that protect you from criticism? Not in the slightest. > > go against the ideas of free speech and of federation, especially in the open source space > Those are your values, not the values of the maintainers. Again, thanks for noticing. > Maybe their relationship to open source is different than yours. And? > Maybe their idea of free speech is different than yours. Clearly, it's why I'm criticising them. > This is no more than you forcing your values on them. Pray tell how I have applied force?
Quarrelsome 4y ago
> If I ask you something nicely Asking nicely is when you submit a PR as well IMHO.
- brigandish 4y ago
  As we're discussing a Reddit alternative it seems apt to use the phrase "username checks out". No, asking nicely is not limited to issues that come with a PR.
  - Quarrelsome 4y ago
    I just think if devs are working on smth for free and I want them to add a feature and they tell me they don't want to then complaining about their attitude is a waste of time as well as rather unbecoming. > As we're discussing a Reddit alternative it seems apt to use the phrase "username checks out". and trying to get something for free and then playing victim when you don't is somewhat akin to being a brigand, ain't it? I'm not entirely sure what such username games buy us given we seemingly both embrace negative connotations in our handles.
    - brigandish 4y ago
      Publishing work open source is not magical protection from criticism, nor from requests, especially when using software with an issue tracker that you leave open to anyone. Whether they receive money for it or not is also irrelevant - would their reaction or their decision be better if they earnt a million quid per issue? No, so let's not bother with such facile excuses. Furthermore, I haven't added anything to the project's issue tracker, and I didn't criticise them for turning down a request but the way they reacted to a request. Please try not to create straw man arguments because they're more convenient to rebut than what has actually been written, that's unbecoming.
      - Quarrelsome 4y ago
        > would their reaction or their decision be better if they earnt a million quid per issue? No, so let's not bother with such facile excuses. It would be super relevant if they got paid a million per issue by the community because then there would be an expectation of receiving something in exchange. Project maintainers don't owe you anything, the whole point of FOSS is that this doesn't matter because you can just fork it and make your own opinionated changes to circumvent differences of opinion instead of achieving nothing but negativity by hand-wringing over tone. > and I didn't criticise them for turning down a request but the way they reacted to a request. We can tone police the OP of that thread as well if you like. The way the OP effectively says: > this [what currently happens] is just bad > this [what I want] is much more sensible has the same capacity to appear aggressive in nature.