So it’s not just the PR, it is also him interacting with “the wrong people”. Because it is so unthinkable to post about another browser developer while developing a browser regardless of politics. Idk anything about Andreas Kling, maybe he is a bad person, but the reasoning in your comment seems unhinged to me.
PS: Maybe off topic, but FDO reasoning for banning Vaxry is also wild. FDO admits he never broke the CoC on their platforms, then the CoC enforcement sends him a threatening email demanding he moderates his community differently and when he pushes back and says he will ignore this person sending unsolicited threatening emails, that is a reason to ban him. Because somehow this unsolicited threatening email is somehow considered part of FDO. Literally manufacturing a cause…
Read again, it’s not just interacting, he’s praising, promoting, and gladly and voluntarily engaging with these people. Not “the wrong people.” Say it with me: far-right misinformation propagandists, queerphobes, a genocide defender. Not “wrong”, with scare quotes, but actually shitty people. And I’m not even done with that comment.
About your ridiculous defense of vaxry, I’m going to be straight with you: violating CoC or not is irrelevant. If you manage a community that toxic, don’t see anything wrong with it, and don’t want to do anything about it, it is normal to want nothing to do with you. No magical binding social contract is necessary for this—if you suck, people don’t want to deal with you.
Collaborating in FDO isn’t a natural right, it’s a privilege earned by contributing. Vaxry made people not want to be there. Vaxry was detracting.
Your entire reply reeks of “it’s not that bad,” which to me reads as “I don’t think those things are bad” and sincerely makes me not want to talk with you further if that’s truly the case.
EDIT: So, I checked your profile, and you have a giant comment thread on things you dislike about DEI, and you also do mental gymnastics to defend the right. Cool, cool. And a comment equivalating “what if kamala did the sieg hail” to the question “what if elon did it?”
First off, I don’t know anything about Vaxry or the Hyperland community, so I am definitely not defending him or implying it is not bad or anything of the sorts. I am saying the public reasoning for the ban is manufactured BS, and I am pretty sure that is because it is hard to call yourself “free” anything if you want to police peoples behavior unrelated to your project.
If you think projects should do such policing, that’s fine. It even makes sense, if you ignore the potential for misuse. But they certainly shouldn’t advertise themselves as free. It’s the hypocrisy of trying to do both by manufacturing an excuse I am calling out.
As for the rest of what you write, I feel it all comes to the same unhinged idea that because someone is a bad person, everything they touch, create or any person engaging with them is also bad.
I dislike Brave, and it’s founder. Doesn’t mean everything Brave does is bad or can’t be promoted by me as good. If you choose to not do it for your personal beliefs, that is fine. But the idea that I am not allowed to praise Brave browser features or other actions because of something unrelated its founder did or said is ridiculous.
EDIT: Regarding your edit, yes. I criticize parts of DEI or stupid anti-Trump arguments. That’s the whole point. Stupid arguments are stupid even if a good person is making them and good arguments are good, even if evil person like Trump makes them. Parts of DEI can be bad, even though discrimination is also bad. The world is not black and white.
EDIT2: Here is my post on DEI if anyone wants to read it and decide for themselves whether it is reasonable criticism or not.
You’re defending him—intentionally or not—because you’re giving legitimacy to the idea that, somehow, the party that kicked him out is in the wrong, not the guy that defends genocide. It’s likely there would be complaints regardless of their official reasoning, because Vaxry’s problem is beyond reason.
I feel it all comes to the same unhinged idea that because someone is a bad person, everything they touch, create or any person engaging with them is also a bad person.
Not at all? There’s a chance I edited my comment after you replied. I’ve made many edits, and I’m not exactly keeping track. Please reread the end of it:
For all its issues, I do hope Ladybird succeeds as a new browser engine because the internet needs more of those. But I’m not touching or otherwise supporting it unless they get their shit sorted.
I hope the project succeeds, that it helps the internet. Doesn’t mean I must like or support the person behind it, specially when they’re acting this way. I believe there are others like me. I would like them to be informed as well.
The idea that I am not allowed to praise Brave browser features because of something unrelated its founder did is ridiculous.
Good news: I never said that. Go on, praise Ladybird. Someone asked about details on “Andreas’ gender issue,” I replied with details. Because I’m tired of people defending it in isolation, I brought more details. Any criticism is of Andreas actions, based on Andreas’ own actions.
You’re defending him—intentionally or not—because you’re giving legitimacy to the idea that, somehow, the party that kicked him out is in the wrong.
Yeah, I am tired of this shit. My entire comment repeatedly spells out that criticizing one party does not mean supporting the other. Both FDO and Vaxry can be in the wrong. If you can’t even comprehend that, there is nothing else to talk about.
Dream, sorry if managed to bungle up and completely misinterpret that point. I feel like I was answering with something important to note, but can’t even tell anymore. I’m physically tired, so maybe I should’ve returned later. In any case, I hope this won’t bother you for long.
So it’s not just the PR, it is also him interacting with “the wrong people”. Because it is so unthinkable to post about another browser developer while developing a browser regardless of politics. Idk anything about Andreas Kling, maybe he is a bad person, but the reasoning in your comment seems unhinged to me.
PS: Maybe off topic, but FDO reasoning for banning Vaxry is also wild. FDO admits he never broke the CoC on their platforms, then the CoC enforcement sends him a threatening email demanding he moderates his community differently and when he pushes back and says he will ignore this person sending unsolicited threatening emails, that is a reason to ban him. Because somehow this unsolicited threatening email is somehow considered part of FDO. Literally manufacturing a cause…
I’m baffled by your comment.
Read again, it’s not just interacting, he’s praising, promoting, and gladly and voluntarily engaging with these people. Not “the wrong people.” Say it with me: far-right misinformation propagandists, queerphobes, a genocide defender. Not “wrong”, with scare quotes, but actually shitty people. And I’m not even done with that comment.
About your ridiculous defense of vaxry, I’m going to be straight with you: violating CoC or not is irrelevant. If you manage a community that toxic, don’t see anything wrong with it, and don’t want to do anything about it, it is normal to want nothing to do with you. No magical binding social contract is necessary for this—if you suck, people don’t want to deal with you.
Collaborating in FDO isn’t a natural right, it’s a privilege earned by contributing. Vaxry made people not want to be there. Vaxry was detracting.
Your entire reply reeks of “it’s not that bad,” which to me reads as “I don’t think those things are bad” and sincerely makes me not want to talk with you further if that’s truly the case.
EDIT: So, I checked your profile, and you have a giant comment thread on things you dislike about DEI, and you also do mental gymnastics to defend the right. Cool, cool. And a comment equivalating “what if kamala did the sieg hail” to the question “what if elon did it?”
First off, I don’t know anything about Vaxry or the Hyperland community, so I am definitely not defending him or implying it is not bad or anything of the sorts. I am saying the public reasoning for the ban is manufactured BS, and I am pretty sure that is because it is hard to call yourself “free” anything if you want to police peoples behavior unrelated to your project.
If you think projects should do such policing, that’s fine. It even makes sense, if you ignore the potential for misuse. But they certainly shouldn’t advertise themselves as free. It’s the hypocrisy of trying to do both by manufacturing an excuse I am calling out.
As for the rest of what you write, I feel it all comes to the same unhinged idea that because someone is a bad person, everything they touch, create or any person engaging with them is also bad.
I dislike Brave, and it’s founder. Doesn’t mean everything Brave does is bad or can’t be promoted by me as good. If you choose to not do it for your personal beliefs, that is fine. But the idea that I am not allowed to praise Brave browser features or other actions because of something unrelated its founder did or said is ridiculous.
EDIT: Regarding your edit, yes. I criticize parts of DEI or stupid anti-Trump arguments. That’s the whole point. Stupid arguments are stupid even if a good person is making them and good arguments are good, even if evil person like Trump makes them. Parts of DEI can be bad, even though discrimination is also bad. The world is not black and white.
EDIT2: Here is my post on DEI if anyone wants to read it and decide for themselves whether it is reasonable criticism or not.
You’re defending him—intentionally or not—because you’re giving legitimacy to the idea that, somehow, the party that kicked him out is in the wrong, not the guy that defends genocide. It’s likely there would be complaints regardless of their official reasoning, because Vaxry’s problem is beyond reason.
Not at all? There’s a chance I edited my comment after you replied. I’ve made many edits, and I’m not exactly keeping track. Please reread the end of it:
I hope the project succeeds, that it helps the internet. Doesn’t mean I must like or support the person behind it, specially when they’re acting this way. I believe there are others like me. I would like them to be informed as well.
Good news: I never said that. Go on, praise Ladybird. Someone asked about details on “Andreas’ gender issue,” I replied with details. Because I’m tired of people defending it in isolation, I brought more details. Any criticism is of Andreas actions, based on Andreas’ own actions.
Yeah, I am tired of this shit. My entire comment repeatedly spells out that criticizing one party does not mean supporting the other. Both FDO and Vaxry can be in the wrong. If you can’t even comprehend that, there is nothing else to talk about.
Dream, sorry if managed to bungle up and completely misinterpret that point. I feel like I was answering with something important to note, but can’t even tell anymore. I’m physically tired, so maybe I should’ve returned later. In any case, I hope this won’t bother you for long.