shutting out a significant portion of your community without seeking their input first isn’t a sensible move for such a foundational open source project.
It actually is a perfectly sensible move, and it doesn’t “shut out” anyone. If anything, prioritizing twitter is what shuts users out. They linked to two-three alternatives. What’s the argument here, exactly, from the other side?
shutting out a significant portion of your community without seeking their input first isn’t a sensible move for such a foundational open source project.
Ironic when X shuts out anyone who isn’t logged in and shuts out anyone who doesn’t pay for a blue checkmark from having visible replies.
Having an X account isn’t consequence-free - if it becomes where updates occur, people have to sign up for an account and subject themselves to nazis everywhere and all manner of crypto spam just to see updates. And they have to pay Elon tribute to be heard in response. It’s crazy that anyone sees it as being friendly to users.
Agreed. Notably, Bluesky doesn’t require an account to read posts.
Yet
Good, now if only OpenSource devs switched from Discord to let’s say Matrix/XMPP
We’d be partying
go back to forums. Support in discord is awful. Discord is not as searchable as a forum public on the internet
The “safety” thing is a bit hyperbolic. I wish they’d just say “the quality of the interactions is going down” or “poor moderation” or something else a little more honest.
Twitter is a shitty platform in structure, format, and moderation. I’m glad Debian’s not on it. But I am disappointed in them for using hyperbolic rhetoric.
Safe is a very broad term. Its not being used hyperbolically here. It’s not referring to physical safety.
Imagine being so fragile you can’t tolerate opposing viewpoints.
