21–30 of 36 posts
Seems pretty obvious why the account has been suspended- user created a wilfully offensive user name and email domain
What if I made a username based on a tradition like in my city (Sächsilüüte) where we burn a snowman named Böög made out of paper and explosives. Let's say I use "burntheböög". Turns out in Swedish, Böög is a derogatory term for gay, so how do you deal with that?
Or even more nuanced. In England cigarettes are often called "Fags". So In England it would be ok to have username "ismokefags" which in the US this would be considered highly offensive.
I mean.. look at his github handle: Farbod rimthekid farbod@nigge.rs
Seems pretty obvious why the account has been suspended- user created a wilfully offensive user name and email domain
That's a bit of a slippery slope with the username. I thought it meant "Research In Motion The Kid". What if I made a username based on a tradition like in my city (Sächsilüüte) where we burn a snowman named Böög made out of paper and explosives. Let's say I use "burntheböög". Turns out in Swedish, Böög is a derogatory term for gay, so how do you deal with that? Or even more nuanced. In England cigarettes are often c…
It’s not as if GitHub doesn’t have a ToS that clearly states this.
“We do not allow content or activity on GitHub that:
(…) is sexually obscene or relates to sexual exploitation or abuse, including of minors;
(…) is discriminatory or abusive toward any individual or group”
If one really cares that much about being able to choose a username freely, it’s probably best to use a self-hosted GitHub alternative.
OTOH, why choose that particular hill to die on?
@dang Can you edit the title to "LibreTube main devs account has been suspended by GitHub for obvious reasons" perhaps ?
Honestly, why do people create usernames like that? Sure, there are different levels of humor in the world. Famously, Linus (from Torvalds) and the comments he made caused, historically pain in LKML but as we all (in the world) as becoming closer due to centralisation of services - should we all slowly align a bit to openness (i.e) from both sides. Do not offend and do not get offended.
Because of that people MUST learn a thing: using third party services is ok, as long as you are still operational without them. For GitHub there is for instance nothing wrong in hosting code on it BUT it MUST end up there, no PR, no CI no others stuff GH offers, just a public repo. Until GH works ok the repo is visible, you get free bandwith etc. When it became unavailable no issues, there are few other code hoster and you can continue develop as usual.
Owning a ML, develop on it, owning a domain name with a small "just homepage" simple site it's pretty cheap, even just with casual donations can be kept up "for free". Choosing NOT to own them because some third party services are nicer and demand less works means choosing to be at risk. That's is.
If even FLOSS devs do not understand that we are doomed, as society, because it's true that in a theoretical full inter-dependent world we must be good citizens to exists, but practice prove another thing: few doing "something better" or at least being more able to spread their services more or less quickly gain dominance and outshine the rest, as a result there is no "theoretical free market" and no anti-trust can help so inter-dependency is not balanced. The sole way to remain in balance at the practical proof is to exists in decentralized systems designed to be owned by no one where interoperability is mandatory just to keep the system up.