| 4 Nov 2021 |
 joepie91 🏳️🌈 | (also, I wouldn't be here discussing this to begin with if I didn't care about the success of NixOS as a project - it would be much easier to avoid this entire discussion and just stick around in communities that have already ensured their long-term health) | 17:47:17 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | (I assume the same is true for everyone else in this discussion) | 17:47:34 |
 @zimbatm:numtide.com | I think the best outcome we could achieve is to create an island of peace and calm, where people with different ideologies can come together and share something positive, and realize that we're all humans in the end.
I know, this is a big ask :) | 17:51:46 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | Jonas Chevalier: I think we generally agree on goals and values, but I feel like you're missing some causal links here - if your goal is to allow 'a maximum of people to participate', then that amount of people is not only necessarily going to include people from many diverse backgrounds, but the software also needs to be representative of people with those diverse backgrounds, and be designed in such a way that it fits in their life.
I really, really do not like phrasing things like this, but it's the only way I can think of right now to produce an obvious example: "rich white cishet guys in the US and europe" have a specific set of circumstances in life due to their status in society, that is not shared by, say, a trans person or a black person in the US. those people will have different issues in life to contend with because they experience society differently (eg. a general looming threat of their environment), and as a result they will also have different needs from the software that they use, different concerns, and so on.
if we want to maximize both the usefulness of and participation in Nix(OS) as a project, then we need to account for those diverse experiences of life, and ensure that the community is a welcoming and safe place for them to contribute, and this lands you back at eg. the "not tolerating bigotry" point.
or in less words: it would be nice if people of different backgrounds and identities had comparable experiences in society, but the reality is that they do not, and so an inclusive community needs to account and compensate for that, and not just be "colorblind" or "neutral"
| 17:55:34 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
you cannot have a functioning community (at scale) with both diversity and 'anti-diverse' ideology in coexistence, so one needs to go; and my choice for what needs to go is very definitively on the side of 'anti-diverse ideology' I think that's assuming that people are monolithic, and already giving up on the group deemed "bad". Of course I agree that if people are antagonistic and causing unnecessary outrage, then they should go. | 17:56:03 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | Jonas Chevalier: as I've already stated before, I do not believe that anyone is 'unfixable' or 'fundamentally bad'. but to put it in explicit terms, as long as one adheres to and expresses an oppressive ideology, they are a threat to a (potential) subset of the community | 17:57:15 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | those people have the choice to not follow that oppressive ideology, and be welcomed back into the community | 17:57:38 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | oh, to be clear: with "expresses an oppressive ideology" I do not mean "talking about politics" | 17:59:32 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | it is generally far, far more subtle than that. | 17:59:43 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | again, this is a very specific view on diversity | 17:59:49 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | correct. | 17:59:56 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | I think pretty much all of the views I've expressed here have been very specific :) | 18:00:12 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | as I've mentioned, I think all the cards should be put on the table | 18:00:40 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | again, this is very reminiscent of the American culture war | 18:03:14 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | it's painting a picture where there are some types of marginalized groups, that need special protections, across very specific lines | 18:04:10 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | nobody is talking about mentally disabled people for example | 18:04:31 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | that's because there are. and I reject the framing of a 'culture war', which implies this is some sort of passing fad. in reality, it's just a long history of systemic social issues coming to a head and finally getting addressed | 18:05:00 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | In reply to @zimbatm:numtide.com
nobody is talking about mentally disabled people for example I did earlier in this discussion, actually | 18:05:21 |
 Jan Tojnar | In reply to @zimbatm:numtide.com
nobody is talking about mentally disabled people for example people are talking about that, stigmatization of mental illness is an issue | 18:05:42 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | what I mean is that there is a specific order that is being painted | 18:07:10 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | and sorry to those who have been though this 1000 times :p | 18:07:36 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | In reply to @zimbatm:numtide.com
what I mean is that there is a specific order that is being painted yes, there is. and contrary to what people often claim, that is not actually a bad thing - it's explicitly calling things out instead of leaving them implicit. | 18:08:11 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | ^ this whole notion is basically what people call "woke" | 18:08:18 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | there is a specific order in society. that is true whether or not you call it out. | 18:08:34 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | we live in a hierarchical society. | 18:08:48 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | I just choose to be explicit about calling out that order and how to counteract it, as best as possible with the means available. | 18:09:06 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | see, this is really the problematic part | 18:09:15 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | by opening this box, now you're thinking of rewriting society as a whole to fix the injustices of the world | 18:09:42 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | now you're going to say that it falls on the NixOS project to participate in that grand effort | 18:10:06 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | not exactly. | 18:10:15 |
