Implementing a standard isn’t an endorsement of the creators of that standard. Do you think LibreOffice and SoftMaker Office endorse Microsoft just because they support the Microsoft OOXML format? If Xfce didn’t implement freedesktop.org’s specifications it would probably not be compatible with all the software people use on it.
1 Like
It seems as though you didn’t read my post. I was specifically referring to the section of the standards that relate to code of conduct, not anything else. And I wasn’t claiming they endorsed all aspects of said standards, hence my usage of “may”.
1 Like
While you are technically correct, you are also putting forth a straw man argument. You are also not correct in all cases, so you can’t apply that standard evenly. Even the standard itself is not applied evenly. So, in instances when people do not agree with M$ and their decisions the standard should win out in areas of disagreement. That is not the case either, because M$ creates the standard to benefit them and no one else. It helps their product be more marketable. Any other product using it in the downstream needs to be aware of changes to the standard or they may lose functionality. The same can be said of freedesktop, especially now that IBM owns it. Their standards are to benefit their ecosystem and everyone wanting to use it must do the same they would do with M$.
However, a CoC directly conflicts with the spirit of FOSS and the freedoms that led to the concept of FOSS existing in the first place. It prevents anyone from contributing because the authors and users of said CoC do not fairly apply the standard (which means it’s not a standard at all). In the realm of consumer support, this is basically saying if you don’t agree with the authors and users of the CoC then you may not use or contribute to the software. In the vague wording of their one-sided enforcement strategy you may not validly criticize them because it may be perceived as some form of discrimination either overtly or covertly. The inevitable conclusion to authoritarianism like this is the dissolution of the collective down to the loyal, and the absolute end to the purpose of the collective.
4 Likes
Love the response and debate there, commendable.
I hate when that happens, guess idiocy has took over their lives right?
True, but since then I hate corporatocracy, I don’t like MS, not because of their decisions which is their decline and downfall of Microsoft Windows OS (Which is the version I am using since I gotta switch OS’s that I gotta test out, like Talon from Raven Dev Team, but I will return back to Linux sooner or later, or maybe in a mean while), but their overall Privacy and Security, they are the certified partners of NSA. But thank god that I have it deblouted and stripped. Nether the less:
You know, since I am not a big fan of Red Hat, IBM, or freedesktop. If we really want to keep away from corporate stuff, then we the hell do we still use software implementations from those? Like SystemD which is also owned by Red Hat, or how about X11? Etc. It does sound contradictory, but really, we gotta be creative, instead of being a tribalistic, fanboyish, good for nothing toxic piece of s###. (Not here to point you a particular character, but the ones we all know who). But really, it all comes to stepping away from big tech influence which, if I am correct, is kinda hard to do so, which is weird to me as a skeptic. Moving on:
So, you mean that collective won’t exist as a purpose because of authoritarianism? My apologies if I have it wrong since I am trying to excursive the meaning here, basically on how to interpret this sentence.
I mean the project will no longer exist as a result of the CoC required to be a part of the collective. It destroys the ability for there to be productivity because less skilled members of the collective have to cope with being left behind. Often, they can’t. So they will form a majority to either bring the productive to heel, or push them out for not reducing their productivity to participate in ahistorical conversations and cultural modifications via struggle sessions. These are why CoC’s seek to remove the meritocracy. The guy that started Ethical Source Movement wrote an entire manifesto about how he can’t compete with others in his field. So he wants to grief and bully those productive people to the extent where FOSS can be a cudgel and they can remove anyone from contributing or using the software. Thus, the Contributor Covenant was born.
6 Likes
Who is John Galt?
1 Like
Look at Wayland. Pushing 2 decades, still not at functional parity with X11.
Look at GNOME.
When meritocracy is abandoned in favor of some kind of ideological purity spiral, everything goes to 
6 Likes
Meritocracy will always beat out any ideological purity test. How many businesses have failed because some clown show decided that people need to be promoted based on their gender, skin color, whatever today’s agenda is now? In every instance, they get eaten alive by their competitors while they scream for more government regulations to save them because “the market is unfair!”
I have seen it where I worked. In the office, those who got promoted not because of their skills, but because they checked the most boxes. Then, the few qualified people in the office had to always cover for them and deal with their mistakes. A few decades ago, if you screwed up that massively, you were let go. But today, if you check enough of those boxes, you get a free pass or even a promotion.
2 Likes
All I can say is… xD 
Additionally, as it is the beginning of Pride Month, I would like to take this opportunity to celebrate and acknowledge the invaluable contributions of LGBTQIA+ members within the KDE community. Their work, creativity, and dedication continue to enrich our project and foster a more inclusive and diverse environment for all.
This celebration is especially important at a time when many large tech corporations are rolling back their visible support for the LGBTQIA+ community. KDE and other grass roots organisations have your back!
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.