| 11 Mar 2024 |
 Shalok Shalom | Has this been taken under consideration? | 20:56:02 |
 patka | In reply to @shalokshalom:dendrite.matrix.org
Has this been taken under consideration? What are you implying? Discussing what? And why in a bad light? | 20:56:37 |
| Shalok Shalom | Well, other open source communities and their contributors could see it critical, and consider NixOS a bad, unethical community or something. | 20:57:30 |
| Shalok Shalom | And that could be a call, we wouldnt loose for a while. | 20:57:41 |
| Shalok Shalom | "The arms dealer OS" or something like that. I think that would be a real consequence to consider. | 20:58:14 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | would they be wrong in considering it as such, if these are the decisions that are made? surely we are more concerned about the actual ethical situation of our community, than about 'keeping up appearances'? | 20:58:28 |
| Shalok Shalom | No, I absolutely do not say that. | 20:58:41 |
| Shalok Shalom | I just struggle to find a substantial ground to argue for or against this decision. | 20:59:04 |
| Shalok Shalom | And it seems, like very subjectively, that people are against this deal, simply because its an arms company. | 20:59:33 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | is that not enough? | 20:59:54 |
| Shalok Shalom | And thats a little vague for me. I consume ethically as well, and in all those cases I do so, since the consequences of my shopping do happen to concern me. | 21:00:08 |
| Shalok Shalom | But I have yet to find a way, how they are benefiting from us taking the money. Its not we have a license, that prevents them from using our code in the first place. | 21:00:46 |
| Shalok Shalom | Which does exist, by the way. | 21:01:06 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | I mean, we could have a conversation about why a company like Anduril might choose to advertise at NixOS, but does that actually matter? like, regardless of their intentions, would we want to be collaborating with an arms dealer? | 21:01:44 |
| Shalok Shalom | The only way I can see how we could damage them, is by closing doors altogether | 21:01:45 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | * I mean, we could have a conversation about why a company like Anduril might choose to advertise at NixOS, but does that actually matter? like, regardless of their intentions or strategies, would we want to be collaborating with an arms dealer? | 21:01:58 |
| Shalok Shalom | They advertise? | 21:02:02 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | that is what sponsorship is | 21:02:10 |
| Shalok Shalom | That is an entirely different deal. | 21:02:15 |
| Shalok Shalom | I didnt know that. And would oppose that as well. I think this is not clearly communicated. I understood it purely as a donation. | 21:02:40 |
| Shalok Shalom | sorry | 21:02:53 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | that may be true for the docs contribution (I have not checked this) but it is certainly not true for NixCon | 21:03:10 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | there is certainly an advertising component to it there | 21:03:21 |
| Shalok Shalom | I think we could split that right there. | 21:03:24 |
| Shalok Shalom | I would be fine with taking their money for documentation. And generally simply taking donations. | 21:03:55 |
| Shalok Shalom | But not sponsorships. | 21:04:10 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | generally speaking this is the difference between 'donation' and 'sponsorship'; a donation is without an expectation of anything in return, a sponsorship is with an expectation of special privileges in return (often advertising plus some other stuff, like a speaker slot for conferences) | 21:04:21 |
| patka | In reply to @shalokshalom:dendrite.matrix.org
That is an entirely different deal. (Please don't see it as a personal attack, because it's not. But I just want to ask you to consider reading up on the situation/material before involving yourself in something. I have seen it happening at least 3 times in different rooms today. It costs energy for everyone) | 21:04:33 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | right | 21:04:32 |
| Shalok Shalom | Yeah, you are right. I could have figured this out myself. | 21:04:40 |
