@Codeberg I just received this email, titled “Your recent Mastodon post” from @dpk on behalf of the Codeberg “Presidium”:

***
Dear Aral Balkan

In your Mastodon post at <https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral/117041803584140945> you publically criticized a repository that was hosted on Codeberg, despite linking to an issue thread in which it was made clear that the content should be reported through our usual internal channels for moderation. The repository in question was reviewed by the moderation team and removed. We understand that you suffered reputational damage as a result of this repository’s content, but this does not justify damaging the reputation of Codeberg e.V. in turn. The moderation team is still a volunteer operation and sometimes it takes a few hours for someone to be available to deal with reports or to ensure that consensus exists.

We therefore warn you not to make posts of this kind that could damage the association’s reputation in future. Acting against the interests of the association can be grounds for exclusion from the membership (§5 (5) of the by-laws). If you have issues with content posted on our site in future, please report it to our moderation team at abuse@codeberg.org. In general, reports sent to that email address will usually receive a reply describing what action was taken once the moderation team has considered how to deal with the reported content.

Kind regards
Presidium
***

So, I have a problem with this.

My post in no way damaged the reputation of Codeberg. It publicly asked them to do something about it and to state, publicly, where they stand on an issue. An issue, may I add, that has to do with real people facing actual genocide as we speak. Not to mention I thanked them for making the right decision (https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral/117043586669877395). If anything, until this email, it made the organisation look better. Unless, of course, opposing certain genocides is something that damages reputations in Germany.

I do not agree with the public issue being closed either. An issue was reported and the response was not “oh, this is serious, we’ll look into it”. It was, rather, “you reported it wrong. Report the same thing at this other place instead.”

And that other place is an entirely opaque internal system where no one gets to see what decision-making process is employed.

This is not the transparency that should exist in a member-run organisation.

So at the end of the day, I am the one being threatened with being removed from membership while the person who is actively trying to harm genocide victims (https://codeberg.org/Linux-Is-Best/) is still welcome on Codeberg?

This is a very insidious form of bothsidesism and, I can only imagine, is to ensure that I keep quiet in the future and to create a chilling effect where we cannot discuss certain things publicly for fear of reprisals.

Well, that won’t be happening.

I am sick and tired of people who cannot provide a proportional response when asked to choose between people harming genocide victims on the one hand and those trying to protect them on the other.

If this means I cannot be a member of Codeberg, so be it.

Let me know if I’m not welcome there and I will leave.

And you can show the world that Linux-Is-Best is welcome and I am not. If that’s who you are.

#codeberg #israel #germany #zionism #genocide #ethnicCleansing #apartheid #settlerColonialism #fediverse #mastodon #transparency #ethics #morals