Re: Testing Discourse for Debian
Ihor Antonov <ihor@antonovs.family> writes:
> And separately, I got interested in Debian because it was using mailing
> lists in the first place. Mail is decentralized by design and this is
> why it is so important for freedom of speech.
I don't understand this comment. Mailing lists are inherently centralized
by design.
> Now you suggest a centralized platform for communication, because it is
> easier to moderate (oppress freedom of speech). To me it sounds like:
> "Yes you can talk, but only if you do it on my terms, on my territory".
> Moderation is a slippery slope, using centralized communication platform
> is one step closer to dictatorship.
The forum to which you sent this message is already moderated and has been
for months. I suspect you didn't even notice.
That said, I will argue that "yes, you can talk, but only if you do it on
my terms, on my territory" is a message that the Debian project should
send about its own communication channels. (Obviously people can go
create their own and that's no business of ours.) That's how we create a
community that can get things done together, rather than a 4chan
free-for-all full of abuse and trolling.
We should think carefully about both the terms and the territory and be
both gentle and understanding, but we will not successfully create a free
Linux distribution (the actual point, after all) within the noise of
complete freedom from consequences in communication.
I don't believe Debian is or should be a welcoming home for people who
care more about the ability to say anything they want whenever they want
in project forums than about making a free software distribution together.
And yes, these two goals do sometimes come into conflict (although we can
try to minimize how often that happens).
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: