I coincidentally started lurking and responding to some support threads the NixOS discourse a few weeks ago, because I appreciate the project and I wanted to get more involved in it. In the past couple days I've seen this train wreck play out in real time, both on discourse and on github discussions.<p>From what I could gather, the main factor that led the community to this point is Anduril's involvement in the community. Anduril is a miltech company and a contractor of the USA DoD. It looks like they use Nix extensively to train ML models and deploy combat drones, and several of their employees have very close ties to the Nix community; Jon Ringer (an Anduril employee, who is mentioned several times in this document) has recently been a release manager for three versions of NixOS, and was nominated to become a release manager for the upcoming 24.05 release.<p>Anduril wanted to sponsor NixCon last year because of this deep involvement in the community. I was not there to see it, but from what I've seen lately, many members of the community were not happy about it. The sponsorship was eventually pulled, because the on-site video team for the conference (<a href="https://c3voc.de/" rel="nofollow">https://c3voc.de/</a>) threatened to pull out on their own over this sponsorship.<p>From my understanding there has been no official decision taken over Anduril's sponsorship since last year's debacle. Many people in the community think that this is because Eelco Dolstra, the creator and de-facto BDFL of Nix, is currently employed by Determinate Systems, which is rumored to have a contract with Anduril.<p>Edit: I just want to make it clear that I don't agree with what is presented in this document. I just wanted to present an overview of what, from my perspective, happened up to this point.
This submission link concretely and factually documents the various malfeasances of the NixOS moderation team in the last few months, and is linked from NixOS RFC 175 as supporting evidence:
<a href="https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/175">https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/175</a><p>The two authors of this RFC, shortly after they opened the PR, got banned by the NixOS moderators.<p>You may join the following Matrix room to discuss the RFC openly,
<a href="https://app.element.io/#/room/#rfc-175-all-together:matrix.org" rel="nofollow">https://app.element.io/#/room/#rfc-175-all-together:matrix.o...</a>
From this document, it appears something obviously wrong is happening in this community, but as an outsider new to all this, it's very hard to understand what's going on.<p>The document is very long and I don't really get the structure. It's very hard to make anything of it really. It somewhat makes me suspicious, even. I would write exactly like this if I knew how to do this and had to sidestep an issue. Long, hard to follow stuff filled with words.<p>Is there a clear summary, an easy-to-follow timeline? (of course these are always going to be presented from one side)<p>Also,<p>> Simultaneously, this group, still upset about the failure of RFC 98, is using the myth of fascism combined with an abusive extension of the paradox of tolerance<p>- What is the myth of fascism?<p>- What is the abusive extension of the paradox of tolerance?<p>I get the paradox of tolerance is that you can't really tolerate intolerance or else you'll be eaten. [1]<p>> The paradox of tolerance states that if a society's practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance</a>
The entire thing seems like a takeover attempt partially because of dislike towards Eelco partially due to some peeps being power hungry. First RFC98, now the open letter. Kinda reminds me the ffmpeg/libav situation.
I wonder what will happen if one starts developing, say, a RTOS for cruise missiles in Rust. Will this be controversial enough to destroy the Rust community?
These documents always seem so desperate, as if the authors are fighting to defend their families.<p>I wonder how much of it is because they have over invested in this community versus their local ones.
It's always good to see such statements with a poisoned well from the start. I have no investment in any of this, but this looks really like the authors of this are the root issue here.<p>And I also agree with - what they call - the opponent, that politics should not be forced upon an open-source project. Proclaiming these are fascists, identitarians or otherwise using the Nazi stamp doesn't really help the author's position either.<p>I'd say this document doesn't belong on HN.
People for whom gender is part of their identity are covertly hostile towards people who don't care. The people that are expelled are never those who have pronouns in their bio's. Respecting (=affirming) gender identity is part of every CoC.<p>Just a feeling. I have no proof.
This is exactly what the opponents of CoC-culture warned about: it's a clever rhetorical smokescreen to allow leftist freaks to do power grabs like this. Words like "harm", "inclusive", "community" etc have dual-meanings, one for the clique insiders and another for the outsiders.<p>And lmao wow, one of the mods involved in this is also a mod at lobste.rs. No wonder the "discussion" there looked so uncanny.
"far-left identitarian" - what's that even supposed to mean, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identitarian_movement" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identitarian_movement</a> is defined as "far-right ethno-nationalism".<p>"left-wing ethno-nationalism" is an oxymoron.
> This is a GitHub web page for the repository "rfc-evidence" owned by user "nrdxp". The page contains the file "rfc_evidences_experiences.md" which is part of the repository's master branch. The page includes various HTML, CSS, and JavaScript files that are used to render the GitHub user interface. The page provides metadata about the repository, such as the description, analytics, and social media sharing information. Overall, this appears to be a standard GitHub repository page for a project called "rfc-evidence".<p>Time saved: 171 minutes.<p>Thanks Kagi-search summarizer....