https://lemmy.ml/post/13864821

I’d understand if they were a random user, but a mod should already have at least some understanding about a community’s topic.

But worse to me are their comments in that post calling the people responding “childish trolls in this community”. I do not think that this is appropriate for a moderator.

  • Lmaydev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Open source doesn’t mean foss.

    I think people being such zealots about getting paid is actually a huge problem with the open source community.

    Giant corporations should absolutely pay to use these projects that are often labours of love done in spare time.

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      The purists and the zealots are the worst part of any community. If the real source (aka not obfuscated) is openly available with no access restrictions like “send me an email to get the source code”, then it’s opensource in my book. “Free” and “Libre” are just additional attributes for a subclass of opensource.

      class Opensource {}
      interface IsFree {}
      interface IsLibre {}
      
      class FOSS extends Opensource implements IsFree {}
      class FLOSS extends Opensource implements IsFree, IsLibre {}
      

      It’s really simple.

      CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

              • chebra@mstdn.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                @onlinepersona Are you ok? You wrote that in your book any non-obfuscated code is open-source. But on the internet, any javascript is sent to the browser as text, so as long as the javascript is non-obfuscated (according to your definition), then it fits your statement about being open-source. But that would mean you consider many proprietary codes as being open-source, which is simply wrong. Open-source is a license, it comes with rights and obligations. It can’t be just about being readable.

                • onlinepersona@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Why wouldn’t it be opensource. It’s right there in the name: the source is open.

                  You not being able to freely redistribute it means it a restrictive license, but it’s opensource. I can look at it, get inspired by the solution, and write another one or a similar one and put another license on it. And if I don’t care about the license, it can just be copied and redistributed 🤷

                  CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

  • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    What the hell? This was all reasonable stuff to discuss in newsgroups thirty years ago and every time the equivalent of xz happened but somehow now it indicates someone doesn’t understand open source?

    And before someone makes the absurd claim that the limits and constraints of open source were settled back then, a state funded targeted attack on an open source project is as good a catalyst as any to uhh… revisit the priors that the “community” holds dear.

    I swear to god you can take the redditors out of Reddit but you can’t take the Reddit out of the redditors.

  • fafff@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t mind moderators having their ideas or even ranting or even blowing off some steam in the thread they make/parecipate in.

    Their moderating job is to avoid the community being drowned in spam/scam etc. and as far as I can see there are few to no spam posts in !opensource@lemmy.ml. In that particular thread they went wild but as far as I can see did not abuse their mod powers.

    tl;dr: judge the moderator as the moderator, and the user as a user. I didn’t particularly like that thread too, but from moderating POV, I haven’t yet seem something by haui I disagree with.

    • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I personally want mods that are a part of the community that they moderate. This is like the Lemmy equivalent of a city cop that lives in the suburbs.

      • redfellow@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        In think that there’s enough space here for differing opinions and discussion. Echo chambers are not good. Fyi: I’m against his idea, but I welcomed the discussion.

  • wahming@monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    But worse to me are their comments in that post calling the people responding “childish trolls in this community”. I do not think that this is appropriate for a moderator.

    Funny, because that’s certainly how most of the responses sound like to me. OP was asking a reasonable question, and most of the responses there were nowhere near civil.

  • shrugal@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Wtf is this witch-hunt?!

    The person asked a legitimate question and was being made fun of by some people, and downvoted to oblivion for completely legitimate viewpoints imo (wanting to make companies give back to foss). A mod should absolutely be allowed to call out childish behavior and herd mentality when they see it, they aren’t supposed to be mindless drones after all! If anything they showed remarkable restraint when faced with some really nasty comments, mostly just stating/defending their opinion and trying to end toxic conversations.

    Please just chill out, and accept that some people have different but equally valid opinions, even mods.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is Lemmy, ml, and a software sub.

      Chilling out is not physically possible.

    • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      This wasn’t even a real question. They basically wanted a brainstorming session on how to write monetization contractually into FOSS, and when overwhelmingly told by the community that their idea was counter to the Libre movement, they argued and made rude comments to anyone that wouldn’t budge.

      People answered the question honestly: No such license exists for FOSS and never will. If they wanted to learn more about FOSS this was their chance.

      This level of ignorance of what this community stands for and contempt for the users here is completely disqualifying for a moderator. The only saving grace here is that they didn’t abuse their moderator powers - if they had it would be like kicking an anthill.

      I don’t want them banned or punished, but I absolutely question their value as a moderator here. It doesn’t reflect well on this community that someone like this has power over what the users can and cannot say, given their own propensity to endorse anti-libre values and insult people who oppose the same.

      • shrugal@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        We really must have read two different posts and sets of comments. All they did was to ask for a foss license that makes for-profit endeavors give back some of the money they earn by using foss projects, just like they have to give back code under most foss licenses. There is nothing bad about that general idea imo, we’ve hopefully all heard about the problems of os projects to sustain themselves, even when they are being used by commercially successful businesses.

        They were then told by some levelheaded people that this doesn’t really work with foss alone, and so accepted that the best course of action would be to dual-license their work going forward.

        Everything else (including what you just wrote) is heavy projection and very toxic behavior by some people imo. Reading things between the lines that absolutely aren’t there, accusing the OP of nefarious motives without any valid justification, claiming that there is only one correct way to do foss or be against “the community”, and so on. That’s cult and herd behavior, it has no place in foss imo, and that’s pretty much exactly what the OP said when they called some of the more toxic responses childish.

        I would encourage you again to realize that there is more than one valid way to think about foss, and that people who don’t 100% agree with your way still aren’t bad people!

  • EunieIsTheBus@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    A mod of a community is there for the purpose of moderation. He neither is nor needs to be an expert or a guru on the topic. If you want to talk and learn about something somewhere where the guy in charge also knows everything go to school / university. Teachers and professors will do the trick

  • redfellow@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I’m not seeing the “insulting users of the community” point you stated OP, could you clarify? I did see one snarky response to a dude calling him an asshole, and I also saw posts stating he shouldn’t be a mod, and generally very hostile responsens. Those in mind, I think his output was quite civil even though I disagree with his reasoning and opinion to large degree.

    This feels like a witchhunt to me, and I for one don’t think a volunteer moderators job should be in question if he has a hot take on something. He’s just keeping the spam etc. clean, he’s allowed to have differing opinions on subjects, as long as there is no misuse of his mod powers.