So Drew DeVault, in a recent post about people changing their primary git branch from "master" to "main," says, "I have still never seen even one first-hand take from a PoC, but I've seen enough second-hand accounts to at least reduce confidence in my position."
I just want to point out that I (conditionally a person of color, at the least, not-white) and other people of color have blocked Drew Devault, for a variety of reasons.
I blocked him because he reply-guyed me to say my unarmed relatives deserved to be shot at Wounded Knee because they weren't complying with the military's orders.
That he lumps himself in with "the left" in a preceding post should give other white leftists pause about those they allow to claim affiliation. His presence in a community, even through having his writing discussed within that community, makes it feel unsafe for me: here is someone who thinks it is okay to kill people like me if we don't listen to people like him. Once again, it is the establishment of "assimilate or be exterminated" as the acceptable standard of cultural exchange between whites and others, and it is only y'all white folk who can stop it.
Said it once, said it ten thousand times. decenter your whiteness.
To put this another way:
It's great y'all switched off Github because they, a corporate entity, collaborate with ICE, but Sourcehut is run by a single individual who says, basically, folk should collaborate and comply, or else they're fair game for acts of violence.
That doesn't really seem better to me. In fact, it seems a lot worse: every person at github might HATE their association with ICE, but cannot choose otherwise because of the rules of the organization, what with shareholders and all. But Drew expressed an explicit fondness for that sort of bootlicking.
I honestly shouldn't have to take the time to spell it out like this for folk. Cut out racists and bootlickers from your tech stack, and if you can't replace them without using other racists and bootlickers, then guess what: you just don't get to use a computer that way for now. Go support people of color attempting to enable that use and wait.
Nothing you're gonna share on this colonial-ass construction called the Web is so important as all that, as to warrant conceding things like "shooting unarmed children is good sometimes," just to share your source code through a specific user interface.
@emsenn sourcehut has other significant product failings, the remediation of which are stated non-goals of the project, which are much more likely to doom it to obscurity than any attribute of the founder.
@sneak I appreciate the intent i think you might've had but this emphasizes technical rigor over not being genocidal and I think that is gross. Sourcehut should fail because people are uninterested in tools built by those who don't share basic values, not because some way down the line matter of opinion about email is untenable.
Again, gross viewpoint, introspect.
@emsenn what is or isn't gross is opinion. the presence/absence of features is fact, and what sells and does not sell in a market is fact. what "should" or "should not" fail is not relevant.
also, what you called a gross viewpoint isn't a viewpoint, it's a statement of fact. re-read my tweet. i've not expressed any opinions here.
@emsenn replying on my own server to things i read on the internet by strangers isn't crossing any boundary, you are mistaken about the way the web works.
you're also mistaken about what (or who) is or isn't supremacist.
@sneak To this first point, I see this brought up a lot, so I'll explain because it seems to be a source of confusion to more than just you:
A great number of people use their "about" entry, whether it be on a website, social media page, or entry in a physical directory, to outline the terms under which they would prefer communication occur. This is a cultural habit of literate peoples for centuries, and has nothing to do with the Web: I'm a human person, who like all people has boundaries. I have used the mechanisms encoded in the communication method to present those. You chose to ignore them, in favor of a metaphor of "you're a post" rather than "you're a person."
I am highly critical of that choice, as it leads to conversations like this, which I provided you with every tool to avoid.
you're lying. if you were avoiding conversations with people like me, you wouldn't be replying telling me how much you avoid conversations like this.
you don't get to control what other people say on the web. your participation in all conversations on activitypub is optional, and opt-in. if you don't want to talk to me, you know where the mute and block buttons are, and nothing forces you to hit reply.
few things are worse than someone posturing like this, tbh. *you* opted in.
@sneak Rather than assume I'm lying or misunderstand the protocol we're using, consider that you're misunderstanding me.
Correct, I am free to chose to reply, and there is no technical mechanism preventing you from replying.
There is, however, a sociocultural one: I explicitly say how I want to be treated in my profile, which you can load before replying. (And, as I've said, this is a habit many people have; you can view that as a lie if you wish, I suppose.)
More generally, you have demonstrated a habit even in this conversation of ignoring cultural mechanisms over computer/digital ones, and that leads to a focused perspective that is leading to misunderstanding, in this case an attempt to break down cultural barriers as "posturing."
I wish you good work in developing your communication skills to allow for a dialog with more other people, for at the moment it has prevented it.
https://sneak.berlin/20191201/american-communication/
i rather wish that people would read my explicit words rather than inventing implications and trying to jam them into my mouth.
@sneak if you believe that then you are who I am instructing to decenter your whiteness.
The "market" is a cultural construct, pointing to it isn't using facts any more than me pointing to stories of spiders and birds is. To think it exists uninfluenced by it's culture is indicative of a perspective that doesn't even know it holds a cultural identity.
In short, you're exactly the sort of arrogant person whose hunches about the world are believed with deep conviction, that is why I say "white non-mutuals don't reply to my posts." I ignored you stepping past that clear boundary because what you said was so casually supremacist, but now I'm going to stick by it. Don't talk to me, you don't understand my posts