| 4 Nov 2021 |
 joepie91 π³οΈβπ | one "metric" I often use is "does this person's presence in the community constitute a net positive or a net negative effect on that community?" | 15:45:52 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | folks who unabashedly adhere to alt-right ideology fall far on the "net negative" side of that spectrum almost without exception | 15:46:23 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | (almost always also in ways that are not directly connectable to "alt-right ideology", like a general unwillingness to consider other people's point of view in technical discussions for example) | 15:47:13 |
 GallantChef | I'm asking in good faith, just as you demonize the alt-right, can we demonize AuthLeft? | 15:47:22 |
| GallantChef | Fundamentally that's what the reaction against RFC0098 is, a reaction against AuthLeft | 15:47:49 |
| GallantChef | I want to see a moderate, non-partisan solution to moderation | 15:48:05 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | GallantChef: I am personally strongly opposed to the authoritarian "left" (though I do not really consider them "left" personally) - however, considering that they are not a dominant social or political force, they are pretty much irrelevant from a community management perspective | 15:48:06 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | this does not apply to the alt-right | 15:48:17 |
| GallantChef | That's interesting | 15:48:29 |
 piegames | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
one "metric" I often use is "does this person's presence in the community constitute a net positive or a net negative effect on that community?" This. I noticed that many of the more vocal and hostile actors in all those heated discussions aren't actually that involved in the community. However in the other direction that's far more difficult: just because a person is invaluable to the community doesn't allow them to be a total ass. | 15:48:33 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | who, especially in privacy/security circles, come rolling in at a ridiculous rate | 15:48:38 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | also, to be clear, I am not suggesting a blanket ban on alt-right ideology in the NixOS community - I have not yet seen a reason to need to do so | 15:49:06 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | I'm just bringing it up as an example of a past situation where a 'policy shortcut' was necessary to keep moderation workable | 15:49:29 |
| GallantChef | Talking about bans on ideologies is inherently auth. Defending language such as "fascism, bigotry, etc." is inherently AuthLeft | 15:49:50 |
| GallantChef | If that's not your intention, then I can respect that. | 15:50:03 |
| GallantChef | But please, let's try and keep it moderate | 15:50:10 |
 Domen KoΕΎar | You consider someone net negative based on judging their morals, that's how humans work | 15:50:40 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | In reply to @gallantchef:matrix.foxears.life
Talking about bans on ideologies is inherently auth. Defending language such as "fascism, bigotry, etc." is inherently AuthLeft it is very much not, and this is decidedly diverging from the actual conversation topic of this room. I've answered your question regarding the authoritarian left in good faith, but that was not an invitation to start trying to redefine the term and steer the conversation towards party politics | 15:50:51 |
| Domen KoΕΎar | For example in balkans ad hominem attacks are used to express love | 15:50:59 |
| Domen KoΕΎar | Most people here would consider that a net negative | 15:51:15 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | as I have expressed before, I do not want this conversation to be about left vs. right. | 15:51:45 |
| GallantChef | I'm not interested in party politics, I'm interested in ensuring that the future mod team doesn't have a lean one way or the other | 15:51:53 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | you are arguing for 'neutrality', which is not a thing that exists, and which will always, always end up supporting the dominant social/political group | 15:52:26 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | whatever it is at the time | 15:52:36 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | I do not believe that this is a desirable goal for the NixOS community, nor that it will lead to a healthy community | 15:52:54 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | in fact, it is the precise thing that this RFC (and the whole conversation around it for the past hour or two) is aiming to move away from - that implicit unspoken set of social norms that makes it vaguer and vaguer what the actual values of the community are | 15:53:26 |
| GallantChef | Only your view will lead to a healthy community | 15:53:27 |
| GallantChef | That's what it sounds like to me | 15:53:33 |
| GallantChef | Almost everyone in the room has been arguing against you exclusively | 15:53:54 |
| joepie91 π³οΈβπ | GallantChef: okay, I'm going to have to be a bit more blunt here to make my point clear: what you are arguing for, is to give equal value to oppressive and fascist ideology, as to inclusive and empathic ideology. in other words, to "make room for fascism". and yes, I can decidedly say that regardless of implementation details, this will lead to a toxic community. | 15:54:37 |
