"Irssi does not take a political stance" • Hacker News Board

Re: "Irssi does not take a political stance"

#31

Post by pedrolucasp » Thu, May 27, 2021, 1:27 PM UTC

josephcsible wrote: post #12

LangerJan wrote: post #10

I don't get the general "we are not political" idea. Everything is political. The conscious decision to stay put is as political as everything else. What they want to say is: "We don't want to get involved in this and save our face while doing so"

> Everything is political. I wouldn't go that far. Irssi could have not taken a political stance, by ignoring what happened and not committing last week's change. But now that that's done, reverting it was political too. You can avoid a political issue, but once you ring the bell, you can't un-ring it.

Inaction is political as well. There's no neutral instance. Keeping in the freenode is not "apolitical" is backing freenode.

Re: "Irssi does not take a political stance"

#32

Post by abathur » Thu, May 27, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

FeepingCreature wrote: post #25

orwin wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have trouble seeing "cancel culture" as something other than shots at overton's window on the liberal side (not really "left" tbh), and a dose of boycott. I find it disturbing that the far right, followed by the conservative right and more recently by the economic liberals could do this as they wished for almost 15 years, and when social liberals do this, there is that much pushback. I mean it is not fair. I unders…

I mean, this is all totally unrelated to the topic. > I understood what the fascist where doing five years ago, and pushed anarchists friends from my youth to do the same on their side, and they did. I mean, my view is: I was against this when the right did it; I haven't stopped being against it when the left started doing it. It's not like I tolerated it from the right any more when they tried - or try - to do it to…

I'm roughly in sync with your I-thought-you-were-better-than-this expression.

But. I think some people out to drive wedges are working overtime to frame a specific subset of "cancellation" as a civilizational threat.

Over the ~decade this has been trending as a narrative I've heard _many_ people all over the left-of-center ideology map _publicly_ express discomfort, disapproval, or outright opposition to this behavior. This isn't a meme spreading _without resistance_.

I don't think it is strategic to help habituate ~management to sacking people when they feel attacked, but I recommend being very skeptical of anyone who agitates on this without labor rights/law/power and ~management's role in the dance all inside their frame. (I realize this isn't a broad solution... more of a razor for separating good faith from bad.)

Re: "Irssi does not take a political stance"

#33

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 27, 2021, 2:19 PM UTC

gerikson wrote: post #27

As a long time irssi user and fan, this revert disturbed me, so I joined #irssi (on Libera, natch) to ask about it. Log of my interaction with Geert: https://paste.debian.net/1198991/ . It's been edited to remove join/parts. My take: the irssi community has not made a decision to move from Freenode to Libera. The commit pointing the default network from Freenode to Libera was thus premature. The revert title could ha…

[deleted]

Re: "Irssi does not take a political stance"

#34

Post by apple4ever » Thu, May 27, 2021, 6:33 PM UTC

gerikson wrote: post #27

As a long time irssi user and fan, this revert disturbed me, so I joined #irssi (on Libera, natch) to ask about it. Log of my interaction with Geert: https://paste.debian.net/1198991/ . It's been edited to remove join/parts. My take: the irssi community has not made a decision to move from Freenode to Libera. The commit pointing the default network from Freenode to Libera was thus premature. The revert title could ha…

Yup I think the problem here is the commit.

All it had to say was "reverting as this was premature".

Even better "irc.example.com" to never make it a problem again.