F-Droid: Public Statement on Neutrality of Free Software
@kuketzblog Very hard to decipher. What does it say, in plain language? That censors wanted F-droid to ban Fedilab and F-droid refused?
@bortzmeyer @kuketzblog concrete things here are pretty simple: while free speech is important, it is not an acceptable defense when we're dealing with a group that harasses, attacks, or explicitly calls for other groups to be hurt.
What we're talking about here is the Paradox of Tolerance:
F-Droid, Tusky, and a majority of the Fediverse are taking a stance here. A stance against intolerance.
To my understanding of the statement on F-droid, it's not against Fedilab, or for Tusky. They support both decisions on each project.
It's to prevent for Gab to release its own app (or a fork) on F-droid, branded to their social network and advertising it, with its known and mainly acknowledged problematics.
It didn't clearly mention "Gab", but it's aimed at it, or any other similar websites :
> a website joined the fediverse only half a month ago that is well known to be a “free speech zone” [...] While in theory this might seem to be a good concept, it has serious consequences: things like racism, sexism, verbal abuse, [...] become popular on such instances.
After, they talk about Tusky and Fedilab, just stating their choices.
Then, they come to say they can't stay neutral (regarding these websites). They didn't say nor mean that Fedilab neutrality is bad, but I agree, the flow can result in that impression.
> it won’t package nor distribute apps [...] that promotes the usage of previously mentioned website, by either its branding, its pre-filled instance domain or any other direct promotion.
To me, it's clear that it targets apps that promote this kind of website (Gab and alike). Either their own, or a fork one, they rebranded, or configured to have direct access to this kind of instances, and so on.
They don't want that on F-droid.
In the end:
> We respect Tusky’s decision to block mentioned website; [...]. We also respect Fedilab’s decision not to hardcode a login block; [...]
They also stand for their position in favor of Fedilab.
@bortzmeyer @rysiek @kuketzblog ah, what a bullshit. Like we show/hide content for the user or decide who you can talk to.
No, if you hang out on the Nazi instance - go and use another client. We won't prevent other users from seeing your bs or from talking to you but we won't provide service to you.
We don't get more control by having less users, quite contrary. Don't twist it.
@panina some wanted to blame Fedilab for not blocking Gab, others wanted to have an AntiFeature slabbed on Tusky for blocking Gab (arguing that would make it NonFree), a few just wanted to shitstorm. Finally the decision was: It's fine that Tusky and Fedilab are as they are – but we won't accept an app openly promoting harassment, violence etc. (e.g. by branding it offensively, like a Gab fork of Tusky with the Gab logo etc, as the blog article lined out).
@IzzyOnDroid yeah, that's how I understood the statement.
Side note: glad to see you here! I really love your repo, excellent place to find new and cutting-edge apps!
Mastodon est un réseau social utilisant des protocoles Web ouverts et des logiciels libres. Tout comme le courriel, il est décentralisé.