Hacker News Reader

Comment by tkel | Hacker News Reader

Well, if you're not part of the community, what do you care?

Are you saying you are opposed to this on the grounds that anything could happen in the future? That doesn't really make sense. Yes, anything could happen. Yes, people change. That is true in nearly all contexts.

If you're asking in good faith, you participate in the community democratically and try to influence others. Just like normal.

There was a vote held for this decision, it was 306-154.

View on HN

> Well, if you're not part of the community, what do you care?

One benefits from the availability of alternatives and a healthy market regardless.

When I go to a vegetarian restaurant I don't demand they serve me a juicy meat burger.

We have different places with different philosophies. It is okay to be different, otherwise everything would look boringly identical.

Sincerely, A meat lover and a codeberg fan.

It's a bit of an inappropriate comparison though, since restaurants are ubiquitous and reasonable GitHub alternatives are vanishingly rare. People are quite rightly more troubled when providers in a low-cardinality space become unviable.

What is a "reasonable GitHub alternative" exactly?

You can literally take the exact same software that Codeberg uses, Forgejo, and stand up your own alternative with different policies, with the only real cost being operational in nature. It seems less the case that it's a "low-cardinality space", and more that people feel entitled to other people's labour under their own terms.

GitHub, Gitlab, Bitbucket, Codeberg, SourceForge, SourceHut, and that's just from the top of my head. That's not what I call "vanishingly rare"

Only GitHub and Gitlab have a large intersection of features. You can probably choose around one from the rest of the list, if they happen to have what you need.

They may be troubled but Codeberg owes them precisely nothing

They have 1085 Voters, only 306 Voters voted for the proposal, and it passed. That might clear their governance requirements on paper, its certainly not a majority of their eligible voting community.

Ok, have you ever been part of a directly democratic organization? Not everyone shows up to every meeting or every vote. An organization I was a part of had quorum at 10%.

Did you know that Australia requires everyone to vote in national elections?

There are also systems that exist between “legally mandated voting” and “whoever shows up”.

You could even set different thresholds based on the importance of the issue! (Decisions like ToS changes would seem to be quite important.)

What about a decision like spam filtering? Is that important?

If it requires a ToS change, sure.

I was pretty clear, it passed according to their rules, it didn't gain a majority of members support. Both can, and in this case are true.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com