@alexandra “Any other answer is a first step towards splitting our community along the many lines of political and ideological divides that have nothing to do with software freedoms.”
Wake up, Eli: the split is already happening, you have no choice except which side to stand on.
@fivetonsflax Eli is on the side of reason.
The GNU project cannot and will not exclude changes that are leaglly validly, conformant to the project goals, make sense for the package, and are/or authored by people or things you dislike.
@amszmidt @fivetonsflax @alexandra @and it’s always a good illustration of one’s character when slave labor is obscured into “things you don’t like”.
@CynAq So you think it is acceptable to check who you are, where you are from, maybe your gender, country location, if your are human or no, and based on that decide if you can contribute?
That is what the “Human” Emacs project is suggesting. _That_ is absurd, racist, misogynistic, ableist, ..
If anything, just caring about the legalese is the only sensible option.
And if the legal option is problematic, it is a far bigger problem than FOSS, or an editor.g
@amszmidt @fivetonsflax @alexandra @and holy straw man, Batman.
The issue is the normalization of rejecting contributions based on abhorrent, unethical, bigoted behavior of their authors. These are not inherent parts of someone’s identity, they are _choices_. Making choices that harm others can and should be basis to reject someone’s participation in society. That’s how societies keep collective safety.
It’s not a purity test issue. It’s a preventing the Nazi bar issue.
@CynAq holy molly, anonymous person, moving goal posts are we? *plonk*
@amszmidt @CynAq @fivetonsflax @alexandra @and attaching your name to a post that betrays you to be a ghoul is so much more shameful than being anonymous
@whitequark
Also, anonymity and pseudonymity are quite different things. I am Ozzelot, have been pretty much always, just because it's not written on any state documents does not make me not Ozzelot.
@amszmidt @CynAq @fivetonsflax @alexandra @and
@ozzelot @amszmidt @CynAq @fivetonsflax @alexandra @and yea that too! orders of magnitude more people know me as "whitequark" than "Catherine", and the former even lasted a decade longer
"oh you're anonymous" is a loser retort said when you know you have nothing to say.
@CynAq FWIW, I decided to block and report this guy rather than engage with him. I looked at his TL and I think he is just an angry troll.
@fivetonsflax yeah, I should’ve done than from the get go. Live and learn 😂
Nov 8, 2026, 7:52 AM@fivetonsflax @alexandra @and This doesn’t at least acknowledge the goals of those driving the split as a tactic
When an outside force gets involved in a civil war, it doesn’t invalidate the goals of the civil war. But it does mean you are required to understand the goals of the invader.
Free software has enemies. Those enemies are practicing strong solidarity amongst their diverse group right now. This is a bad omen, in itself.
It’s possible — not easy, just possible — to park an argument for now and spend time where it matters. For now just make a list of what you agree on and don’t agree on. Somebody will have to let something continue under protest, stating what the risks are, and allow it to continue risking.
If only we had lots of examples of assholes interfering with the creation of good code. If only it was astoundingly obvious that, even if someone only cares about software and not human beings, the logical conclusion is to exclude racists, sexists, and creeps because they never produce enough good code to make up for the people they drive away.
Or we could, regardless of whether “he does good work”, make decisions based on human rights. Because we’re humans.