| 7 Nov 2021 |
 tomberek | Irenes: The absence of that statement would have caused questions? By whom? | 01:26:34 |
 Irenes | by people who can sense that the RFC has some ideological position behind it (which is anyone with solid reading comprehension, I'd hope) but aren't sure what it is | 01:27:40 |
| tomberek | I'm not understanding. Was it to provide clarity about the ideological position of the proposal? I'm not sure what the questions would be. | 01:52:25 |
| Irenes | yes. | 01:56:12 |
| Irenes | the questions would be: what is the ideology behind this proposal? how can we trust someone who writes an ideological proposal but doesn't disclose what the ideology is? | 01:56:44 |
| Irenes | remember, people have vastly differing amounts of context about all this stuff. there are certain respects in which we didn't adequately take that into account in the first draft, but we did think about it. | 01:57:32 |
| tomberek | When a large amount of questions did come in, and the ensuing confusion and escalation in the discussion, did that suggest that the proposal should retain that clause for clarity? | 02:01:17 |
| Irenes | (sorry about the delay, I was doing other stuff) | 03:46:40 |
| Irenes | yeah, I mean, we surfaced the issue so that it could be discussed, and people had questions because they'd never thought about it before, and that was the discussion we wanted to have. | 03:47:27 |
| Irenes | I don't know if I would say "clarity" as the reason for keeping it at that point, but certainly I don't think removing it would accomplish anything positive, and it would send a message that I would expect to have pretty negative effects. | 03:48:09 |
 Ellie | I mean, personally, removing it would read a little like "NixOS can't even get it together enough to agree not to spread fascism". To me at least, this seems like a very very low bar. Certainly one could say the same this about any number of abhorrent things, but fascism does stand out as something tech circles ought to be very wary of | 05:20:15 |
| Irenes | thank you. yes, that's what I meant. it means more coming from someone besides me. | 06:25:01 |
| Irenes | but yeah, I won't link anything so as not to conjure a discussion of the details into existence here, but the Scala community is going through some intense stuff about exactly that lately (fascism, and whether to reject it) | 07:02:42 |
| Irenes | it speaks well of the Nix community that that's never been an overt issue here | 07:03:05 |
| Irenes | and in fact that has been a factor in why I'm involved with Nix to begin with | 07:03:41 |
| Irenes | but we shouldn't imagine that we're immune to controversies just because we're a technical community | 07:03:59 |
| Irenes | like any community, we're made of people | 07:04:09 |
| Irenes | people are messy, people bring all their complex stuff from the outside world with them, wherever they go | 07:04:21 |
| Irenes | again, people from marginalized backgrounds tend to be hyper-aware of this stuff when it happens around us | 07:05:07 |
| Irenes | whereas people who don't have as much immediately at risk, are more likely to tune it out and forget about it | 07:05:35 |
| Irenes | so that's why there's these divergent views with some people pointing out, correctly, that fascism is a huge issue that's been sweeping through tech communities of all kinds over the past few years | 07:06:18 |
| Irenes | and others who are surprised to even hear the word | 07:06:26 |
| Irenes | and I don't blame people for not being aware, everyone comes to this stuff in their own time | 07:06:37 |
