Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

Post by duxup » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 3:21 AM UTC

jjmarr wrote: post #99

danpalmer wrote: post #5

Why? Banning abuse is fine, and disliking Cryptocurrency projects at a moral level is fine, but running a coffee hosting service and putting your moral judgements on projects like this just seems childish and unserious. I'm also apparently banned from reading the article, despite having no previous usage of Codeberg or any history with the project, so I can't even see their reasoning.

In the words of the person who announced the ban, when moderating a discussion on it 8 months prior:[1] > > Dear Codeberg, please push out and ban these political fighters. > This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop. the maintainers of Codeberg do not believe that they are…

Post by b40d-48b2-979e » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 3:22 AM UTC

iamnothere wrote: post #73

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This attitude is toxic and will drive off other projects that aren’t associated with crypto. Once you have to factor in political risk with your source hosting, other alternatives become more appealing. At this point any project that’s even vaguely controversial ought to be looking at fully decentralized solutions like Radicle.

Post by loeg » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 3:24 AM UTC

iamnothere wrote: post #105

loeg wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just fundamentally disagree that hosting sites should be agnostic to content. Should they host malware? Anything related to CSAM? Clearly it is reasonable for them to exercise some editorial control, and this is not a crazy use of that power.

What about emulators? E2EE? P2P software? Software that gets used to leak state secrets? VPNs? Once you open the door, it’s going to be really difficult to resist political pressure in other areas. The mob is easily swayed against new targets.

Post by matheusmoreira » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 3:26 AM UTC

kurante wrote: post #133

jdormit wrote: post #107

Wow. I have never worked on any cryptocurrency projects and never intend to, but I will certainly be staying very far away from Codeberg because of this. There are some levels of censorship that make sense for a code forge - “you can’t do crimes on our servers”, “you can’t host malware on our servers”, etc. But inflicting a subjective moral judgement on an entire category of software sends the message that this isn’t…

I strongly disagree: I think this is a perfectly acceptable action. No project is entitled to host their project there, nor is any project compelled to do so, so I don't see why there is any harm in having this instance of Forgejo moderate itself as it sees fit. They have no moral requirement to support all kinds of software. If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code fo…

Post by iamnothere » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 3:26 AM UTC

loeg wrote: post #165

iamnothere wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about emulators? E2EE? P2P software? Software that gets used to leak state secrets? VPNs? Once you open the door, it’s going to be really difficult to resist political pressure in other areas. The mob is easily swayed against new targets.

Yes? Every hosting provider should be considering what they want to host. Of course it's fine for providers to take some sort of speech maximalism stance if they want to , but it is also reasonable not to.