3 ms·

You are spot on that they are demonstrating the virtuous, morally correct thing to do. Are you saying that’s bad? If so, why?

teddyh 2y ago
Debian is an organization with an opinion on free software. Debian might also reasonably have an opinion about the centralized nature of X and similar platforms. They may even have opinions on the nature of proper discourse on its own discussion forums and similar venues they themselves control. But for Debian to have an opinion about political issues like this is a bit beyond their purview. People don’t, or should not be made to, sign up to support an organization with a definite position about everything under the sun. This would seem to me to be the opposite of diversity, a value they claim to support.
- angoragoats 2y ago
  > People don’t, or should not be made to, sign up to support an organization with a definite position about everything under the sun. I agree. This is about one particular issue: whether they're going to continue hanging out at the Nazi bar, and as someone who doesn't hang out there, I for one appreciate learning their stance on it. It's a very important issue, and as you said above, it is absolutely the virtuous thing to do. > This would seem to me to be the opposite of diversity, a value they claim to support. If your definition of "diversity" includes treating white supremacists, Christian nationalists, rapists, violent criminals, etc on equal ground as everyone else, I think you should carefully examine your own morality.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - teddyh 2y ago
    There’s something to be said for the opposite approach. There is a Buddhist temple in Las Vegas, I think. “Only Nixon could go to China.”. But you are perhaps right in that Debian would be the wrong choice for this role; this would probably be better served by some more general human rights organization, of which I am sadly not informed enough to suggest one. > as someone who doesn't hang out there, I for one appreciate learning their stance on it. Why? You know you are not going to use X. The only benefit you could get from learning about Debian’s change of policy is only the dubious pleasure of having your preexisting beliefs validated. But this is all that Debian will accomplish with this kind of public wide announcement. People who do use X could just as well hear about it on X, and would not need a wider public announcement. This is why I called this “virtue signalling”: Debian is not making this announcement to everyone, Debian is announcing to everybody who does not use X that their decision is correct and that they are good and virtuous people. This is a very low and cheap way to get appreciation, and only worsens the politicization and polarization of the issue.
    - angoragoats 2y ago
      > Why? You know you are not going to use X. The only benefit you could get from learning about Debian’s change of policy is only the dubious pleasure of having your preexisting beliefs validated. No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. > Debian is not making this announcement to everyone, Yes, they are. Posting only to Twitter would reach a smaller audience. Or are you saying that the average Twitter user doesn’t know/care to surf the web? > This is a very low and cheap way to get appreciation How so? > and only worsens the politicization and polarization of the issue. Human rights are not a political issue, and a site that is run by, staffed by, and platforms people who wish to take away human rights should be shunned, loudly and often.
      - teddyh 2y ago
        > No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. This fits my description exactly. You gained no useful information from this announcement, and you will change nothing in your behaviour as a result of it. The only thing which this announcement gave you is a nice fuzzy feeling of validation. > Yes, they are. Compared to what Debian could have reasonably done – i.e. post the announcement to the actual X account which Debian is closing – announcing to the entire world that Debian no will longer post to X is announcing to the subset of the world which does not use or read X. > How so? It is giving people warm fuzzy feelings of being vindicated in their beliefs, when these specific beliefs are not, IMHO, relevant for Debian. > Human rights are not a political issue, and a site that is run by, staffed by, and platforms people who wish to take away human rights should be shunned, loudly and often. That ”or platforms” is doing a lot of heavy lifting. By this reasoning, anyone using the internet, or the web, at all is implicitly supporting a platform used by a lot of unpleasant people with unsavory beliefs. Or if the internet is too big, how about Google? Should Google be “shunned” if they don’t black-hole certain sites and beliefs in Google’s search results? Should Google Maps remove all references to unwanted people or businesses? Should Cloudflare be held liable for every site Cloudflare provides DDoS protection for? How about hosting providers? Internet service providers who provide peering with any of the above? Your list of people to shun grows long very quickly. Not to mention that of you do get your way, once the mechanisms have been put in place, they will easily turn on a dime to suppress your beliefs instead. Also, why should Debian, specifically, take on the public advocacy role against X? Debian is not supposed to advocate for every single thing which you think is good – Debian is supposed to restrict their advocacy to issues relevant to Debian.

teddyh 2y ago

Debian is an organization with an opinion on free software. Debian might also reasonably have an opinion about the centralized nature of X and similar platforms. They may even have opinions on the nature of proper discourse on its own discussion forums and similar venues they themselves control. But for Debian to have an opinion about political issues like this is a bit beyond their purview. People don’t, or should not be made to, sign up to support an organization with a definite position about everything under the sun. This would seem to me to be the opposite of diversity, a value they claim to support.

angoragoats 2y ago
> People don’t, or should not be made to, sign up to support an organization with a definite position about everything under the sun. I agree. This is about one particular issue: whether they're going to continue hanging out at the Nazi bar, and as someone who doesn't hang out there, I for one appreciate learning their stance on it. It's a very important issue, and as you said above, it is absolutely the virtuous thing to do. > This would seem to me to be the opposite of diversity, a value they claim to support. If your definition of "diversity" includes treating white supremacists, Christian nationalists, rapists, violent criminals, etc on equal ground as everyone else, I think you should carefully examine your own morality.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- teddyh 2y ago
  There’s something to be said for the opposite approach. There is a Buddhist temple in Las Vegas, I think. “Only Nixon could go to China.”. But you are perhaps right in that Debian would be the wrong choice for this role; this would probably be better served by some more general human rights organization, of which I am sadly not informed enough to suggest one. > as someone who doesn't hang out there, I for one appreciate learning their stance on it. Why? You know you are not going to use X. The only benefit you could get from learning about Debian’s change of policy is only the dubious pleasure of having your preexisting beliefs validated. But this is all that Debian will accomplish with this kind of public wide announcement. People who do use X could just as well hear about it on X, and would not need a wider public announcement. This is why I called this “virtue signalling”: Debian is not making this announcement to everyone, Debian is announcing to everybody who does not use X that their decision is correct and that they are good and virtuous people. This is a very low and cheap way to get appreciation, and only worsens the politicization and polarization of the issue.
  - angoragoats 2y ago
    > Why? You know you are not going to use X. The only benefit you could get from learning about Debian’s change of policy is only the dubious pleasure of having your preexisting beliefs validated. No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. > Debian is not making this announcement to everyone, Yes, they are. Posting only to Twitter would reach a smaller audience. Or are you saying that the average Twitter user doesn’t know/care to surf the web? > This is a very low and cheap way to get appreciation How so? > and only worsens the politicization and polarization of the issue. Human rights are not a political issue, and a site that is run by, staffed by, and platforms people who wish to take away human rights should be shunned, loudly and often.
    - teddyh 2y ago
      > No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. This fits my description exactly. You gained no useful information from this announcement, and you will change nothing in your behaviour as a result of it. The only thing which this announcement gave you is a nice fuzzy feeling of validation. > Yes, they are. Compared to what Debian could have reasonably done – i.e. post the announcement to the actual X account which Debian is closing – announcing to the entire world that Debian no will longer post to X is announcing to the subset of the world which does not use or read X. > How so? It is giving people warm fuzzy feelings of being vindicated in their beliefs, when these specific beliefs are not, IMHO, relevant for Debian. > Human rights are not a political issue, and a site that is run by, staffed by, and platforms people who wish to take away human rights should be shunned, loudly and often. That ”or platforms” is doing a lot of heavy lifting. By this reasoning, anyone using the internet, or the web, at all is implicitly supporting a platform used by a lot of unpleasant people with unsavory beliefs. Or if the internet is too big, how about Google? Should Google be “shunned” if they don’t black-hole certain sites and beliefs in Google’s search results? Should Google Maps remove all references to unwanted people or businesses? Should Cloudflare be held liable for every site Cloudflare provides DDoS protection for? How about hosting providers? Internet service providers who provide peering with any of the above? Your list of people to shun grows long very quickly. Not to mention that of you do get your way, once the mechanisms have been put in place, they will easily turn on a dime to suppress your beliefs instead. Also, why should Debian, specifically, take on the public advocacy role against X? Debian is not supposed to advocate for every single thing which you think is good – Debian is supposed to restrict their advocacy to issues relevant to Debian.