i quickly dug into this myself and as far as i can tell everything checks out, so i was wrong in my original post. thanks for pulling those quotes out of this thread! (i mean that genuinely)
i’ll check hyprland properly later but if all of this is true, i don’t mind hyprland getting funding.
the point i was trying to make in my original post is that there are people who are actively feeling threatened and rightfully so, which causes emotions to be amplified a lot more, which at least from my perspective is why people reacted so hard to this whole thing, myself included.
This is an interesting point to make for someone who had a third of his employees quit after he put in place a policy to effectively stop employees complaining about things they found problematic in the company.
Or it’s just an example of the anti-non-white-immigration sentiment I’ve noticed from certain Scandinavian countries over the course of a couple of decades. Just because someone who’s overall left wing has a problem with foreigners doesn’t mean that having a problem with foreigners is a left wing view.
In the context of this thread, “big tent” means “we are perfectly okay with Nazis, and Nazi adjacent ideologies, and don’t care if we finance projects that ultimately support and encourage said ideologies”
The day you don’t kick a Nazi out of your big tent, you don’t have a big tent anymore. You have a Nazi tent.
You mean for Banning Politics At Work, getting rid of DEI, and refocusing on the actual work?
In their own private company, without firing a single person?
Those who left disagreed with the policy and chose to leave, that’s their right. Great move from them, definitely deserve applause for calling it out way before others did. Politics have nothing to do with the work of companies like Basecamp or Framework.
I hope Framework bans politics in this forum too, once this thread is done.
Sorry, but I have to call it: you’re missing the reality entirely. Scandinavian countries, especially Denmark, have among Europe’s highest per capita immigration rates. Denmark started worrying after years of failed integration, with Denmark’s PM being very specific:
We believed when people came here and were given good opportunities, they would integrate… All of us who thought that way have been wrong.
When Denmark’s left-wing Social Democratic PM says mass immigration threatens social cohesion, she speaks from experience.
Dismissing legitimate policy concerns as anti-non-white-immigration sentiment is exactly the kind of … labeling that shuts down honest discussion.
Giving money to framework is now giving money, indirectly, to fascists. There was a time when political discourse had room for respectful disagreement. Not today. The US political right is literally protecting Nazis and pedophiles, and now framework is inviting them into their “big tent”.
You accuse me of not engaging with substance while you’ve ignored every substantive point I’ve made.
DHH wrote about demographic change and integration challenges. The left wing Danish PM lady said nearly identical things: that mass immigration threatened social cohesion, that integration failed, that they were wrong to assume it would work. Is she a fascist too?
You dismiss the Wikipedia reliability markers as a technicality, but those markers exist precisely because multiple sources made unfounded claims. That’s not avoiding substance, rather pointing out the accusations have no credible foundation.
On TR’s march: DHH referenced ordinary British people (n.b including many immigrants) marching with flags. He explicitly noted these were perfectly normal, peaceful Brits frustrated with being ignored. That’s not endorsing TR’s views, or id it?
You wrote I’ll always find a way to disregard information. Yet you’ve dismissed Denmark as an example based on experience, Wikipedia’s reliability markers, and the distinction between discussing immigration policy versus endorsing fascism. You did exactly what you accuse me of.
And racist feelings? Scandinavian countries, including Denmark, took in massive per capita immigration, tried their best at integration for decades, and adjusted course based on outcomes and experience. Calling evidence based policy concerns racist feelings is…
The “what about…” strategy has been extensively used by media programs self proclaiming to be “right-wing conservative”. It’s a fairly effective misdirection strategy. Just pick something else and ask about that. Don’t accept their tangent, just ignore it and stay on message.
Cherry-picking small parts of your statement and fabricating tenous links is also another common method. It wastes your time trying to rebutt arguments that don’t really exist. Again it’s to get you off track.
Stay on the primary statement. It’s the one thing they won’t tackle head-on because they don’t really have anything.
You can also ignore calls to “stay in your lane”, “don’t say anything if you’re not constructive”, etc. They just want you to stop bringing up that primary message. It’s their kryptonite. They need you to stop saying it. Your voice matters. Don’t feel intimidated.
We don’t have a firm stance on Framework’s intentions in supporting people who spread hateful views. That shouldn’t be a difficult or controversial answer. Either you care about an inclusive open community and didn’t realize DHH doesn’t, or you don’t really care. The answer to this is substance. Everything else is a distraction.
You’re coaching people on manipulation tactics because you can’t engage with the actual facts.
There’s zero evidence DHH is far right or fascist, I’ve provided Wikipedia sources showing those claims are unreliable. You ignored them.
Framework sponsored a tech conference, not a political campaign. You’re trying to force them into your political battle. Companies have the right to stay neutral. Demanding they denounce someone or be labeled complicit is actually coercion.
At least there should be some reflection about DHH’s own writings, amongst them there are the ones where he sulks about how few real Brits are seen these days in London, and badly stereotyping plenty of other cultural backgrounds. It’s not about the labels someone has put, it’s about what he wrote and how it compares to the principles of the readers.
Also, if we’re going to speak about broad / big / wide tents or whatever, let’s use that term. Some of us expect a broader tent of principles. Beyond just repairs, particularly these days.
Someone was holding a very small wikipedia sentence, probably written prior to that rambling. The issues is that facts of this matter are written by himself.
Also it’s funny how sometimes wikipedia’s editorial bias has to be fixed because it is left-leaning, and how some other times a very smal tiny sentence is held so often and so repeatedly.
Coming back to the very little bits of information that are expected to come from this thread, I’d like to see how this develops with regards to Gnome, KDE, and others. I have to say that I was scanning the internet about Gnome’s allegedly steer, but only could find disinformation coming from a known player in that field, so I appreciate the message left by @cassidyjames and I expect to see more coming --here or in some other forums.
And there it is. When faced with a left wing leader saying the same things as DHH, you simply declare she’s not actually left wing.
You’ve made your position unfalsifiable: anyone who disagrees with you on immigration gets redefined as right wing by definition, proving your point circularly.
There’s nothing left to discuss. You’ll dismiss any evidence that contradicts your narrative.
I can’t support Framework if they’re enabling the types of people that would like to see my family broken up (I’m an American, married to a british wife and am living in the UK on a spouse visa)
It’s stressful it enough being on an immigration path and having far right grifters campaigning on invalidating your VALID & Legal immigration pathway. You’re inviting people into your “big tent” that want people like me out even though we’re here legally and doing everything by the book?
There are more inappropriate (but concise!) ways of wording your stance, but we’re on a public forum.
And here I thought Didoing was exclusively used with comparatively low-level things like content warnings and microaggressions, but now someone’s going “It’s Not So Bad” over literal transphobic murder. Cool. In case we needed any more indication.