The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter • Hacker News Board

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#21

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Feb 04, 2025, 9:47 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #20

angoragoats wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why? You know you are not going to use X. The only benefit you could get from learning about Debian’s change of policy is only the dubious pleasure of having your preexisting beliefs validated. No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. > Debia…

> No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. This fits my description exactly. You gained no useful information from this announcement, and you will change nothing in your behaviour as a result of it. The only thing which this announcement gave y…

[deleted]

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#22

Post by angoragoats » Tue, Feb 04, 2025, 9:52 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #20

angoragoats wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why? You know you are not going to use X. The only benefit you could get from learning about Debian’s change of policy is only the dubious pleasure of having your preexisting beliefs validated. No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. > Debia…

> No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. This fits my description exactly. You gained no useful information from this announcement, and you will change nothing in your behaviour as a result of it. The only thing which this announcement gave y…

I don't think you're arguing in good faith here. Have a good one!

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#23

Post by belorn » Tue, Feb 04, 2025, 10:40 PM UTC

angoragoats wrote: post #22

teddyh wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. This fits my description exactly. You gained no useful information from this announcement, and you will change nothing in your behaviour as a result of it. The only thing which this announcement gave y…

I don't think you're arguing in good faith here. Have a good one!

Is it so hard to believe that some people do not want to mix software advocacy with political advocacy? It no more bad faith than people arguing that they want to keep their professional life and personal life separate.

I find it much easier to trust Debian if they don't involve themself with world politics and focus on software freedoms. Same with a company if they focus on being a company rather than a political advocacy.

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#24

Post by angoragoats » Tue, Feb 04, 2025, 10:44 PM UTC

belorn wrote: post #23

angoragoats wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you're arguing in good faith here. Have a good one!

Is it so hard to believe that some people do not want to mix software advocacy with political advocacy? It no more bad faith than people arguing that they want to keep their professional life and personal life separate. I find it much easier to trust Debian if they don't involve themself with world politics and focus on software freedoms. Same with a company if they focus on being a company rather than a political ad…

Advocating for the right of minorities and other disadvantaged groups to exist is not “world politics” and it saddens me that I’ve had to say this multiple times on this site.

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#25

Post by teddyh » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 11:41 AM UTC

angoragoats wrote: post #13

hulitu wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Expressing ethical values signals to others that these values matter and encourages collective action. When, and only when, you follow them. See politician or priests for very bad examples.

Do you have any reason to believe that Debian does not follow its own ethical values?

There are certainly some who think so: https://danielpocock.com/blog/>

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#26

Post by teddyh » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 11:51 AM UTC

angoragoats wrote: post #24

belorn wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it so hard to believe that some people do not want to mix software advocacy with political advocacy? It no more bad faith than people arguing that they want to keep their professional life and personal life separate. I find it much easier to trust Debian if they don't involve themself with world politics and focus on software freedoms. Same with a company if they focus on being a company rather than a political ad…

Advocating for the right of minorities and other disadvantaged groups to exist is not “world politics” and it saddens me that I’ve had to say this multiple times on this site.

> Advocating for the right of minorities and other disadvantaged groups to exist is not “world politics”

The top-level topic was the stated reason for Debian to stop posting on X, which was “[…] we feel X doesn't reflect Debian shared values as stated in our social contract, code of conduct and diversity statement. X evolved into a place where people we care about don't feel safe.”. This does not even name who is feeling unsafe, and certainly does not say that X is against the existence of “minorities and other disadvantaged groups”.

And this is not even relevant to our subtopic in this tree, where I have never argued against the existence of anyone. It is utterly disingenous of you to cast aspersions that everyone not agreeing with you – in this case me – are standing with what X is being indirectly accused of.

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#27

Post by teddyh » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 11:54 AM UTC

angoragoats wrote: post #22

teddyh wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, I appreciate learning their stance on it because now I know they do actually stand by the values that are posted on their website, and I know that I won’t need to be looking for an alternative Linux distribution. This fits my description exactly. You gained no useful information from this announcement, and you will change nothing in your behaviour as a result of it. The only thing which this announcement gave y…

I don't think you're arguing in good faith here. Have a good one!

ITYM that you have run out of arguments and your ad-hominem accusations are not working.

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#28

Post by angoragoats » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 6:03 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #27

angoragoats wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you're arguing in good faith here. Have a good one!

ITYM that you have run out of arguments and your ad-hominem accusations are not working.

No, but next time please learn about what an ad hominem fallacy is[0], because you just committed one.

[0] https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html

Re: The Debian Publicity Team will no longer post on X/Twitter

#29

Post by teddyh » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 7:26 PM UTC

angoragoats wrote: post #28

teddyh wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ITYM that you have run out of arguments and your ad-hominem accusations are not working.

No, but next time please learn about what an ad hominem fallacy is[0], because you just committed one. [0] https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html

Accusing me, out of the blue, of not arguing in good faith is certainly what I would call an ad hominem. According to your link, which does seem plausible, I am wrong about this definition, and I admit that I very well could be.

This still does not make it OK for you to accuse me of not arguing in good faith, without explaining how.