| 13 Mar 2024 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | especially with the news that apparently the open letter has been signed by enough contributors to be responsible for 25% of the nixpkgs contributions, I question whether the Foundation is meeting its obligations here | 18:38:04 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | (with the obligatory caveat that I am not a certified legal translator) | 18:39:28 |
 K. Werty | In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
This is not constructive The only intent of the statement is to communicate that this utterly unacceptable. | 18:39:35 |
| K. Werty | Especially with 25% contributers signing a petition? Is NixOS run on "first past the post"? | 18:40:21 |
 Janik (they/them) | In reply to @kaywerty:fnord.theinfinitycorporation.com
Especially with 25% contributers signing a petition? Is NixOS run on "first past the post"? not 25% of contributors just the people who do 25% of the work | 18:41:04 |
| Janik (they/them) | (probably even more because the stats don't include moderation, infra, etc... and since the stats were taken more people singed the letter) | 18:41:47 |
 Federico Damián Schonborn | 25% was *with* r-ryantm | 18:41:54 |
| Janik (they/them) | * (probably even more because the stats don't include moderation, infra, etc... and since the time the stats were taken more people singed the letter) | 18:42:06 |
 piegames | In reply to @kaywerty:fnord.theinfinitycorporation.com
The only intent of the statement is to communicate that this utterly unacceptable. Angry shouting people abound these days | 18:42:26 |
| Federico Damián Schonborn | In reply to @janik0:matrix.org
removing r-ryantm from the equation (by appending -involves:r-ryantm to the query) results in 92992 total prs and 26766 prs done by people who signed the letter, which is roughly 29% of contributions. See this ^ | 18:42:46 |
| Janik (they/them) | In reply to @federicodschonborn:matrix.org
25% was *with* r-ryantm that only somewhat counts because if someone merges a r-ryantm pr it does get counted as involvement in the pr. | 18:43:02 |
 tgunnoe | I hope you find solace in your stance then. I am personally satisfied that the board was able come to an amicable solution and not bow to external pressures. For next time, we'll have a better polity set in stone that we can site and less of this divisiveness going forward | 18:43:34 |
| K. Werty | Its clearly a significant amount. Those are all people who very likely might feel bad enough about this decision to stop contributing to the project. Not only is it the wrong decision, it's a bad decision for the future of the project. Shortsighted and motivated by short-term financial gain. | 18:43:47 |
| K. Werty | In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
Angry shouting people abound these days One might consider that to be a red flag with respect to governance. | 18:43:58 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | I do think that the real-world contribution percentage is probably higher, but I would say that 25% is already enough to raise serious questions about the Foundation's legal obligations, and I don't know how much value there is in trying to quantify precise amounts of difficult-to-quantify things | 18:44:19 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | that seems like something that's unlikely to result in much useful, and more likely to result in endless arguing :) | 18:45:16 |
| tgunnoe | it's a good thing that other prospective sponsors or donars can look from the outside at the project and see some consistence and less last minute changes | 18:45:27 |
 delroth | do you imagine that "better policy" would (beyond any reasonable doubt) allow for Anduril as a sponsor? if not, then why wait for the "better policy" to be designed to say no to Anduril? | 18:45:35 |
| delroth | if your "better policy" accepts Anduril as a sponsor all you're saying is that you want a policy that ignores the hundreds of contributors that have deemed this unacceptable | 18:46:13 |
| delroth | * do you imagine that "better policy" would allow for Anduril as a sponsor? if not, then why wait for the "better policy" to be designed to say no to Anduril? | 18:47:14 |
| tgunnoe | In reply to @delroth:delroth.net
do you imagine that "better policy" would allow for Anduril as a sponsor? if not, then why wait for the "better policy" to be designed to say no to Anduril? are they an illegal entity? are they sactioned? those seem to be reasonable red flags to deny sponsorships, otherwise I've only heard hearsay about perceived damages | 18:47:45 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | that seems like a lot of words to roundabout-justify something that I'm pretty sure you're well aware is harmful | 18:48:39 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | you're free to have your own ethical boundaries of course, but I find it very strange to present them as if they are the "reasonable" option (as opposed to just the ones you prefer) | 18:49:25 |
| delroth | In reply to @ultranix:matrix.org
are they an illegal entity? are they sactioned? those seem to be reasonable red flags to deny sponsorships, otherwise I've only heard hearsay about perceived damages how is this relevant to the fact that a large chunk of the community does not want Anduril to be sponsored? | 18:49:33 |
| delroth | In reply to @ultranix:matrix.org
are they an illegal entity? are they sactioned? those seem to be reasonable red flags to deny sponsorships, otherwise I've only heard hearsay about perceived damages * how is this relevant to the fact that a large chunk of the community does not want Anduril to be sponsoring? | 18:49:43 |
| K. Werty | Anyway, I DO consider fighting against the (nearly complete) normalization of the military industrial complex to be constructive, so I respectfully disagree. | 18:50:00 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | I think the people having this conversation here broadly agree with you on the ethical front | 18:50:32 |
| K. Werty | * Anyway, I DO consider fighting against the (nearly complete) normalization of the military industrial complex to be constructive, so I respectfully disagree with the statement that calling it unacceptable is non-constructive. | 18:50:38 |
| tgunnoe | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
that seems like a lot of words to roundabout-justify something that I'm pretty sure you're well aware is harmful I'm not aware. I've heard that they have saved quite a lot of lives with their sensor towers. i havent seen any deaths contributed however, and I've asked multiple times where I can find that data | 18:50:45 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | and so a more helpful conversation would be what to do next | 18:50:55 |
