Comments by "Winnetou17" (@Winnetou17) on "Solutions For The Political Division Within The Linux Community" video.

If they start talking about socio-political issues, you tell them politely that it's out of scope of the FOSS project. If they continue to do so, then they are not respectful and can be booted off from the project.
8
But isn't that exactly what he's saying here ? A project should be about a single thing. Firefox should be a good browser, not save the planet.
7
I think you didn't understood it. If you follow ALL the points, then your project will be just about the FOSS (say, Hyperland). With no socio-political issues attached. If someone tries to bring a socio-political issue on the table, then it will be informed that is out of scope. If they insist, for any reason, then they are not nice and can be booted off the project.
2
Don't remember exactly if he has a video exactly for that, but he does have an entire series of configuring emacs.
2
You can dual boot on the same drive, but it's a hassle. Updates will wipe the bootloader and you'll have to manually remake it. So rather that set you up for headaches (or worse, lost data, not to mention time ... or sanity) I think it's only normal that most distros simply don't have that option in the installer. It will only do harm.
2
I fully agree with your #4
2
@davidgomez79 Did he do that in an official FOSS project context ? That is, in their issue tracker ? Or on their mailing lists ? Or in their discord, if they have one ? Because I don't think he's against the idea of having and debating politics. Just that it should be outside of FOSS projects. To give a very simple example, let's say we're working on the same project, like a browser. It's totally ok to argue whom to vote. The debate itself is not bad / a problem. It is a problem if we're doing that in the browser's discord. It should be in a private channel/platform or in a discord about whom to vote.
2
I know, right ?
2
What is that religious figure and its quote ?
1
Care to mentiono why ? Not the unsubcribing, but the lost at part.
1
Neutral or no pronouns sounds like a good idea, in the context of over-the-Internet-in-text-form collaborating. And, yes, whatever side someone votes is indeed irrelevant. That's the "politics" part that people say that it should be kept out. Although FOSS itself is political, whatever else has nothing to do with a software project should be left out. On number #4 ... yes. Pineapple or pizza is totally irrelevant when you develop Firefox. As such is spam and if somebody insists on doing it, it should be booted off the project. For that, it should either be completely outside the project (like here on YT, not in a github issue) or maybe, in a "off-topic, you are on your own" forum section.
1
Holy moly, the amount of people so SO eager to point out that freedom is political, but never acknowledge / mention that the "political" in the OP (and many other comments) is about the ones that have nothing to do with that particular software and software in general. Like what party is better in whatever country. Or what rights some people should have. Or that some campaign needs support. Or that some kids in Africa are starving. All of those should be off-topic. At most I can see something like raising funds for some humanitarian stuff, but that should be a small thing to the side, not something to be debated.
1
@willardorwud Thank you, finally, somebody saying it correctly, that the problem is the other issues (which are mostly political) but which have nothing to do with the project.
1
Ideally one would stop caring what others think of it, if they don't care enough to actually make a proper image of it. Or would challenge them if they say something stupid that is based on assumptions. But I have to admit, sometimes it's simply tiresome to deal with it. But I still think that's the good way forward
1
Because this is how we evolve ? By having talks about how we think we should do things better ?
1
@BitsOfTruth I think there's a saving grace here - FOSS projects are done basically exclusively online. With text. In places where you can have a pseudonim. In this context, having a custom pronoun is (to me, at least) the same as having a pseudonim. My name is not really Winnetou17, but people call me that if they want to talk with me. In a way, you can say they are forced to do so. But nobody forced them to talk (well, write) to me. Of course, there's a grey area that DT didn't talked about, what do you do when people take same troll names. If I call myself "God Allmight Himself" in the hopes that I'll see someone commenting in an issue "God Allmight Himself said that we should use the integer function" just for a cheap giggle... well, it's blasphemy for same people, and a known one. In these cases I'd say that the owner of such a name/title/pronoun should provide an id or proof that that's its actual name/title/pronoun and if not, to change its name/title/pronoun to one where such an action would not be neccesary.
1
@rmccombs66 On the usage part, it feels too arbitrary, I don't think you can enforce that. If you specify in the license what is that you disagree (eg "this cannot be used by people who use other pronouns other than "he/him" and "she/her"" instead of "this cannot be used by people who disagree with developer X") then ... that might be interpreted as discrimination and also not enforceable in western countries. And in both cases, in practice it will open up the developer to be massively boycotted for having such a strong opinion. So ... yeah. Oh, and also, this wouldn't be considered free software anymore, if there are usage restrictions.
1
How is that different from having a pseudonim ? My real name is not Winnetou17, yet, in a way, I'm forcing you to call me like that. Isn't this the same thing ?
1
1. How is that different than simply having a pseudonim online ? Do you feel bad in any way that you have to call me Winnetou17, which, let me tell you, is not my real name ? Do you feel like you have to lie about other parts of our conversation because of this ? 2. Stop communicating, as part of the project, on instant messaging, which is more emotion prone. You can still have discussions in github issues and on mailing lists. Where people usually put more thought and effort and aren't simply going to make a bad joke, or other quickly go into a flame war because somebody typed a bit faster than was able to think. It's a bit strict, but I see the value, it should work. 3. How can not joining as a contributor stop you in any way of being interested ? I am a contributor of exactly 0 (zero) FOSS projects, even though I am a developer, and I'm still very much interested in a good bunch of FOSS projects. When I'll retire, I think I'll even start contributing. Are you actually trying to be trolling or do you actually think like what DT said is to stop being interested ? 4. Here DT could've given more examples. The idea is to separate and to have a project about a single thing. Like, a browser is about being a browser, you enter an address, it fetches the data from that addreess and renders it. It should not save the planet, care about the poor kids in Africa and so on. Those should be different projects. This allows the project that is about software to stay apolitical and in general focused and not dwelve into endless talks about inclusivity and other flame wars like that (though a flame war about micro vs monolithic kernel is totally ok)
1
@bakters Yeah, you're right on the pseudonym vs identity, but I'd say that matters when you are in person. On the internet, on github issues, maybe even on Discord ... does it matter ? As in, is there a context where the difference between just using a name and believing it to be true, is there a context where these are different ? It's true that DT didn't mention that this is only for in-text-over-the-internet collaboration. Given the nature of FOSS projects nowadays, that can be implied, or most would think as such, but it would've been good to be mentioned, to set the stage, so to speak.
1
@ryanstallbaumer What if you get booted out of your own project for refusing to work with such a person, which only joined the project like 3 months ago ?
1
Good point! I think you can make a definition that's more precise - if something sounds like its trolling, then the owner should provide some id or some other proof that that is its actual name / title /pronoun. If not, then kindly asked to change it. This will weed out people like you said, to which I can add another one "God Allmight Himself". But if that person can provide proof that its name is actually "Pussy Slayer" (who knows, maybe some jurisdition somewhere allows it) then that can stay.
1
But those young people can still hangout in Discord, it's just that there will be no project-owned Discord server. They will have to do it on a personal one. Or a fan one. Or a less related. The thing is that the project will have the github/gitlab issues to report a bug. Or a forum. It is less convenient and slow than using Discord indeed. But I kind of agree with DT, I think it's healthier long-term. Instant messaging can go south quite fast.
1
If it's something that looks like trolling, like say, calling themselves to be "God Allmighty Himself" then ask to change their name. If they can provide proof (like an id) that that's their actual name (just in case, you never know when some island nation relaxes the law and allows somebody to be called "Pussy Slayer XXX"), then it stays, otherwise it should be changed to one that's ok. Or be booted off the project if they don't want to.
1
@athenasmolls3698 Holy moly, the amount of people so SO eager to point out that politics are everywhere where there's multiple people, but never acknowledge / mention that the "political" in the OP (and many other comments) is about the ones that have nothing to do with that particular software and software in general. Like what party is better in whatever country. Or what rights some people should have. Or that some campaign needs support. Or that some kids in Africa are starving. All of those should be off-topic. At most I can see something like raising funds for some humanitarian stuff, but that should be a small thing to the side, not something to be debated.
1
I wouldn't say it's naive and never working. Let's say we ditch the pronouns. Isn't there the same exact problem if someone joins with the name "God Allmighty Himself" ? Or simply "Jesus Christ" ? Your non-religious open source project will have to check which names are valid or not. I say for all, names, titles and pronouns, if they sound like they are trolling (and this can be a complaint from someone, with arguments why is it trolling, just in case it is not obvious) then that person should provide proof (like an id) that that's their actual name/title/pronoun. If not they have to change it to one that's not controversial. Or be booted off the project if they don't want to.
1