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.
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 @emsenn
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."