Hi to you both, Not placing this in context..I do not want to break up the flow of your points here. Still, I do have a question or two. Evan, if dhh did not want to sway others to his thinking, why do you feel he placed a blog, that folks were going to find, as they seek information about Omarcy? These days, one has to be very careful, use certain words if you are sharing an opinion you hope is considered a part from your projects. To be sure, true inclusion is allowing the presence of those whose view of the world does not resonate with your own..so long as they offer the same courtesy. so long as everyone treats it a bit like the United Nations, everyone has the right to leave the room if something is being said they do not like. What concerns me here though is this. As his community of contributors goes, is he going to honor his personal definition of the world, and exclude community members who do not look like him? Let's say you have built a business using this open source software. While I understand your stance that the product should not be limited by the Creator, what would you say to clients or customers this person wants to vote out of the human family? Ron's point that individuals should make an informed decision, speaking personally, plays to the marketplace of ideas. YOu need those stances known so that you as an individual can choose if, with a clear conscience, you can stand by the product. How would you defend your choice to ignore his views on people, if some of those people who are customers discover his beliefs. Speaking personally, it is not about community members being painted with the same brush. These days of social media will make that almost a certainty, unless this person makes a clear distinction between how he views humanity, and how he will welcome community members and contributors who do not share his perspective. Is he doing this here? Does a clear line exist between the blog he posted, and his approach to open source community building? Does he, in this blog make it clear he does not hope others will come to share his views. As you say, not forcing his perspective on to people. Speaking personally, his posting the blog..at all, makes that a touch hard to believe...after all, when he is interviewed, he will be asked about that blog. he wanted the world to know where he stands..or he would not have used this blog to introduce himself to the world. Yes, it is absolutely possible to separate art from artist. I sometimes use the Charles dickens example. Does knowing that Charles dickens in an effort to free himself so he could chase an 18 year old girl, tried to have his wife and the mother of all his children committed to an insane asylum..mean I cannot enjoy A tale of two cities? Just my thoughts, Kare On Mon, 29 Sep 2025, Ron via Talk wrote:
Evan Leibovitch via Talk wrote on 2025-09-27 23:57:
*6. The politics I can do without.*
Two of the first comments received about Omarchy were not about the quality of the software, but the character of the project founder.
I guess that's me. My comments touched on both. Without experience with Omarchy, there wasn't much I could add on that front.
As for DHH, people should have such information on the founder when making decisions - what they do with it is their choice.
If I was going to shun every every software project led by an arrogant, self-righteous asshole with politics I found abhorrent I probably would never have started using Linux because I wouldn't be able to use gcc way back when. Richard Stallman has repeatedly repulsed me in-person
Picks his toes / nose and eats it is in a whole different class than White Replacement Theory in 2025.
I'm unfamiliar with Stallman's politics other than "free as in speech" software. Who is he targeting based on ethnicity?
I find this quite disturbing and to the detriment of the open source movement.
What I find disturbing is that merely pointing out someone holding such opinions, in 2025, would be "disturbing" to anyone.
Not caring about his White Replacement politics doesn't mean those political opinions won't care about us.
Building inclusive communities does not just mean diversity of geographies, skin tones and various forms of self-identification; it also means including people with whose views outside the git repository you don't share.
The "Paradox of tolerance" is extending tolerance to those who are themselves intolerant; it's a one-way courtesy. In such cases, it is not obligatory and has led to a dangerous rightward ratcheting of policy.
No one said Omarchy should be shunned based on DHH's views. But many may find it relevant information to feed into the calculations on whether a given non-essential software is worth pursuing.
The only thing that should matter among coders is the quality of the work
I wonder if a non-white, London-based coder who writes high quality code, are they still seen as a blight on London by the likes of DHH? He made no distinction about "quality of $x" in his blog post. To him, it seems, what matters is about skin colour / ethnicity.
and the ability to work with others civilly.
Is being a civil racist okay?
So long as one doesn't actually force their politics within their peer group or on their users I see no reason to exclude them, let alone boycott their code.
If they force (or advocate) their odious politics outside the project, is one not allowed to boycott them on principle?
I get it. The FOSS community, from its inception, leans left
I maintain that being in opposition to the creeping fascism in the West is not "leaning left". I reject repositioning the Overton Window like that.
consider that projects such as Omarchy now have communities of contributors, in the dozens if not hundreds. Are they all to be tarred with the sins of the founder? Is heavy-handed guilt-by- association really a useful tactic?
That feels a bit hyperbolic - if one chooses to not use a piece of software due to the views of the founder, that's their right and what is up with low-grade shaming them for it?
There's no "tarring" nor "guilt-by-association" happening.
For heaven's sake; if recent events in the US have taught us anything it's that /the heat must come down/. Everywhere.
This "Both-Sides" BS pandering is one of the reasons we're in this mess.
Today's example:
Arizona *lawmaker* calls for WA congresswoman to be executed for urging Trump protests
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/arizona-lawmaker-calls-wa- congresswoman-003640893.html
etc ad nauseam
Comments welcome.
I meant to focus on the utilities like ghostty but turns out, more had to be said on off-topic stuff, so I said it.
No intention to derail the technical merits of Omarchy.
------------------------------------ Description: GTALUG Talk Unsubscribe via Talk-unsubscribe@lists.gtalug.org Start a new thread: talk@lists.gtalug.org This message archived at https://lists.gtalug.org/archives/list/talk@lists.gtalug.org/message/IQSC7LP...