Re:"Irssi does not take a political stance"
by kanbara on Thursday May 27, 2021 @01:57AM
(#27299843)
nah m8. everything is political. they’re basically saying they’re oke with the destruction of a community and the hostile intentions against FOSS because of one man’s megalomaniacal psyche.
anyone that thinks most decisions are apolitical are living in a vacuum tube or are just too privileged to give a shit. too many ppl in tech dont want to put themselves in another’s shoes
Re:"Irssi does not take a political stance"
by josephcsible on Thursday May 27, 2021 @01:59AM
(#27299854)
> they’re basically saying they’re oke with the destruction of a community and the hostile intentions against FOSS because of one man’s megalomaniacal psyche.
I agree that the revert we're discussing did this and so was political. I'm saying that in the hypothetical world where this commit didn't exist but neither did last week's that it reverted, there irssi truly would be apolitical still.
Re:"Irssi does not take a political stance"
by FeepingCreature on Thursday May 27, 2021 @02:13AM
(#27299935)
I'm not convinced that inaction is inherently apolitical, but it would certainly be more defensible.
Re:"Irssi does not take a political stance"
by pedrolucasp on Thursday May 27, 2021 @09:27AM
(#27302799)
Inaction is political as well. There's no neutral instance. Keeping in the freenode is not "apolitical" is backing freenode.
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.