Can we stop villifying people we disagree with?
I've seen it so much, I'm more inclined to believe it absolutely didn't happen that way.
I've seen it so much, I'm more inclined to believe it absolutely didn't happen that way.
"I'd recommend against this open source project because it has a solo author who has a track record of not playing well with each others" strikes me as statement of fact, not vilifying.
That this happened is a statement of fact.
I'm taking my old ford explorer over to him this weekend. Do you know why?
Because I asked him what was wrong and explained the intent of the questions. We've had a working relationship for over 2 years, he was obviously having a bad day. No harm, no foul, humans are humans.
And yet, his negative behavior is a statement of fact. Imagine if I then went around town telling everyone not to use this man because he "doesn't play well with others". I mean, it's only a statement of fact, right?
Point of fact, the engine light in the truck came on earlier this week, I called him up and then drove it over so he could check codes (O2 sensor needs replacing). Had a conversation with him, where he told me his wife is living in Arizona to be a live-in baby sitter for their kids new baby, and he drives over there every other weekend (I knew his wife was in Arizona, but didn't know why).
You're campaigning against a piece of software because you don't like the author. Not for technical reasons, but because the author "forced" (your words) stuff onto other people, then after these innocents reverted it back in defense of the whole of fediverse and he got mad and said mean stuff, so now we need to defend the reader (me, and everyone else) from his meanness.
If you say so.
I'm glad you ended up having a working relationship with your mechanic but I don't think it's really relevant here. Your mechanic is not maintaining an open source project. He's fixing your car. Which is a great solo project.
I think you're confused about my perspective so let me be clear: I'm not concerned with "defending" the reader from "meanness". I'm suggesting that investing in any project run by a single person is risky: more than likely if that person quits then the project is dead. That's strike one. The fact that the single author has a history of being combative with open source collaborators suggests it might be harder for the project to ever move beyond being a solo project. That's strike two.
All of this is just common sense. I'm sorry if it rubs you the wrong way. If your mechanic decides to stop maintaining your car in the future there will be hundreds of other mechanics waiting to take the job (and, importantly, your money). A solo open source project depending on volunteers is a lot less likely to have that.
Stop bringing your personal drama here please.
I replied to your post, responding to the issues you raised in your original post. Engage with it or don't engage with it, that's up to you, but don't fill the forum with nonsense. Absent any actual interaction with the points I raised this will be my last reply in the thread.
So no, it's definitely you who are bringing the personal drama here. To the extent that one can't help wondering, mr Random-string-of-letters-and-numbers, whether you are that hostile solo developer.
https://blog.alexgleason.me/trans/
would trigger some people
Which makes sense and means I pegged it correctly.
• Literal Neo-Nazi site. Defederated by nearly all of Fedi because they are literal, card-carrying Nazis.
• Transphobia-even-if-it-means-misogyny site run by his wife. Defederated by most of fedi, for harassment campaigns. Defederated from my instance for harassing a cis woman who worked at a feminist charity for, as I recall, having pronouns in her bio, which is apparently too much like solidarity for them. (There were a couple of good people on that instance, last time I checked. Well, one good person. I think she messaged me later, saying she left.)
• His personal instance that basically nobody uses. (It's too obscure to be blocked by most of Fedi, but it's blocked by most of the instances he tries to interact with; he inevitably breaks their rules.)
• shitposter.club: A kinda-okay, but not moderated to my taste, instance. Blocked by some of fedi; probably on the list because they still federate with his personal instance.
• freespeechextremist.com: A barely moderated instance that… well, I trust its sysadmin – sorry, its BOFH. And it is friendly. But it's a "free speech zone", with all that entails; there are some total arseholes there, and the only thing keeping them from causing major damage is the relentless bullying they get from the other users until they leave.
The bottom two are legitimately part of the Fediverse – albeit the shady alleyways of the Fediverse – but we've almost universally shunned the top three. This developer used SEO hacks to get his fake near the top of the search results. (Please don't link it here; we don't need to give it more SEO juice.)
He does not represent the people who make the protocols; he does not represent the people who curate the communities; he does not represent the communities; and yet he claims to, all the while decrying how mean the community is being to him.
We just want to live our lives, and use the 'net to talk to each other. If anyone's making this political, it's him.
Why is it fake just because you don't like the choice of recommended instances. Does it not make sense to recommend instances that are more open to federating with others?
if you want to just live your life, stop posting about how some guy who has no access to your life beyond you looking at his stuff or being shown it on fedi. just block the guy, mute instance, set up a reject, and fucking focus on something else. theres other shit to do that isnt giving a shit about some nerd on the internet that you dont like. theres so many other things in fact that i'd imagine you'd enjoy doing much more than thinking about Alex Gleason. have a good day yo.
Nah, shady alleyways are great. I'm friendly acquaintances with quite a few people there, and it's legitimately the right place for them. They're just not places I'd send somebody new to the Fediverse to, for the same reason I wouldn't direct a tourist through the backstreets. Sorry if the analogy wasn't clear.
But the others? They aren't legitimate members of the community. They're not making the protocols; they're not interested in the ideals or in collaboration; and they want to hurt the people who are.
> when you lead off with They're Literal Neo Nazis
I don't know how else to describe them. What do you call somebody who puts Nazi armbands, pictures of Adolf Hitler, and the word 'Nazi' in their bio, and regularly talks about how much they want to commit genocide? People who are so aligned with Nazism that they even call themselves Nazis are not welcome. It's not just "views". They want to murder us. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
> many of them are [Nazis], same with fse or spc or any other given.
Nope, couldn't find any Nazis on SPC. There are xenophobes and self-described fascists on FSE, but I haven't seen any card-carrying Nazis – and I've already said what I have to say about that instance, anyway. If somebody there starts causing problems for the rest of Fedi, they soon discover they can't take what they dish out.
There are disagreements about basically everything else, but the Fediverse does not tolerate actual Nazis.
> stop posting about how some guy who has no access to your life
To my knowledge, this is the second thing I've written about him that wasn't to him. (The first was my previous comment in this thread.) I don't have any particular reason to rant about him – but that doesn't mean I'm going to avoid discussing him when it's relevant.
He's not a stranger to me. While he was still tolerated in them, we ran in the same circles. I trusted him enough to approve his follow request.¹ The last conversation I remember us having – before I made some followers-only posts about myself that, apparently, put me on his 'undesirables' list – was me being excited to play his upcoming video game.²
It's not a case of him being kicked out of our spaces; he removed himself from them with his antagonistic and bullying behaviour. (He even tried to force people to use his protocols by deliberately breaking compatibility; that's not how the Fediverse works.) And now he's pretending he speaks for the whole Fediverse – something none of us do – when his software isn't even compatible with Diaspora*. And he's telling people that a group of Nazis is the Fediverse's idea of "welcoming to newcomers".
If he stopped being such a prick, I'd welcome him back. Because I liked him.
---
¹: He uses Pleroma, so everything short of DMs would've shown up on his Home timeline. Unlike Mastodon's Home timeline algorithm, this would've included unlisted replies to other people's unlisted threads, and my parts of 'followers-only' conversations even where he wasn't following the other participants. So, quite a lot of access to my life, actually.
²: The video game appears abandoned, now; it's unfinished, and hasn't been worked on for over two years. Must've dropped off his list of priorities.