Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

discourse.nixos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 134 posts

Re: NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

#31

Post by zahlman »

bbor wrote: post #18
pizlonator wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like a lot of political baggage for an open source project and a recipe for drama. Is any of this overhead really needed? What does it accomplish? (Serious question, maybe I’m just too dim to get it)

Idk, “there’s a group of people in charge and we elect them” seems like a pretty basic starting point for any community, not an over-complication!

Except the moderators are not elected but are self-appointing, and they were in place before the steering committee was created.

Re: NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

#32

Post by pessimizer »

k__ wrote: post #21
TacticalCoder wrote: post #8

Just to be clear: in some drama about one year ago the moderation team considered that people could be banned solely based on their political opinions if those happened to be right-wing / MAGA / anti-wokism. Then the drama extended because people, even if they weren't right-wing/MAGA/anti-wokism had to agree with the moderators' political opinions. So when TFA writes this: > apparently trying to address perceptions o…

[flagged]

They also don't understand that everyone who disagrees with me is trying to eradicate me and people like me from existence, and is also racist (although we are both white and upper-middle class.) /s

Re: NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

#33

Post by Macha »

taink wrote: post #23
zahlman wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get the feeling like their insistence on things like CoCs is ultimately just used as a false flag to censor "wrong" opinions based on colorful interpretations of subjective terminology used in the policy. I don't think the term "false flag" works that way, but it 110% is exactly that. Consider how they frame the proposal to add other mods: > intially phrased as a suggestion, with a stated goal of adding “diversit…

Can you elaborate on using "folks" instead of "people"? I'm unfamiliar with the difference as english is not my first language. For reference, to my knowledge these words are pretty much interchangeable with "folks" being less formal I guess.

Using the casual “folks” in a context that would ordinarily be more formal is considered a bit more liberal I guess.

Re: NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

#36

Post by perching_aix »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #8

Just to be clear: in some drama about one year ago the moderation team considered that people could be banned solely based on their political opinions if those happened to be right-wing / MAGA / anti-wokism. Then the drama extended because people, even if they weren't right-wing/MAGA/anti-wokism had to agree with the moderators' political opinions. So when TFA writes this: > apparently trying to address perceptions o…

> anti-wokism

Is that being up in arms about the usage of woks? I always knew it was a fairly controversial piece of kitchen equipment, but this is a concerning development.

Re: NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

#37

Post by [deleted] »

taink wrote: post #23
zahlman wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get the feeling like their insistence on things like CoCs is ultimately just used as a false flag to censor "wrong" opinions based on colorful interpretations of subjective terminology used in the policy. I don't think the term "false flag" works that way, but it 110% is exactly that. Consider how they frame the proposal to add other mods: > intially phrased as a suggestion, with a stated goal of adding “diversit…

Can you elaborate on using "folks" instead of "people"? I'm unfamiliar with the difference as english is not my first language. For reference, to my knowledge these words are pretty much interchangeable with "folks" being less formal I guess.

[deleted]

Re: NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

#38

Post by refulgentis »

bbor wrote: post #11

HA, wow, thanks for posting. It’s hard to recall another instance of someone writing something so confident that they’ll come off well, while clearly coming off as self-centered; “our (unelected) team was being steered by the (elected) steering committee” and “they kept annoyingly fighting for objective moderation practices” are pretty damning complaints, especially when given without any actual context! The framing…

[flagged]

Re: NixOS moderation team resigns over NixOS Steering Committee's interference

#40

Post by zahlman »

taink wrote: post #23
zahlman wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get the feeling like their insistence on things like CoCs is ultimately just used as a false flag to censor "wrong" opinions based on colorful interpretations of subjective terminology used in the policy. I don't think the term "false flag" works that way, but it 110% is exactly that. Consider how they frame the proposal to add other mods: > intially phrased as a suggestion, with a stated goal of adding “diversit…

Can you elaborate on using "folks" instead of "people"? I'm unfamiliar with the difference as english is not my first language. For reference, to my knowledge these words are pretty much interchangeable with "folks" being less formal I guess.

> For reference, to my knowledge these words are pretty much interchangeable with "folks" being less formal I guess.

"folks" is indeed less formal, but there are other words in this category, such as "guys". The preference for "folks" is common among people who hold that "guys" is inherently sexist, and thus eventually becomes a signal of a particular perception of what kinds of sexism exist in the world and how sexism works. There are also those who believe that certain uses of "people" have become in some way or another problematic

In print contexts, some even further use this to signal especial interest in issues related to trans rights, by spelling it "folx". That requires the additional explanation that the "x" comes from analogy with other neologisms such as "latinx" that are intended not only to affirm gender neutrality but a non-binary view of gender. Because the reader is expected to recognize this, it functions as a sort of shibboleth.

Possibly useful references: https://old.reddit.com/r/socialjustice101/comments/agozlt ; https://old.reddit.com/r/socialjustice101/comments/itiisx ; https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/523419/ ; https://www.huffpost.com/entry/gendered-language-hey-guys_l_...

As little as ten years ago, "folks" might have been judged as quaint or outdated language, used primarily by older people (https://hinative.com/questions/51383). It was largely repurposed for this social justice signaling.

Also notably, you will find people with similar beliefs using expressions like "y'all" and other Southern US regionalisms, even if they're white Northerners. From my observations this seems to be intended as an act of solidarity. "Folks" arguably also belongs in this category.

Post reply on HN