https://lemmy.ml/post/13864821

I’d understand if they were a random user, but a mod should already have at least some understanding about a community’s topic.

But worse to me are their comments in that post calling the people responding “childish trolls in this community”. I do not think that this is appropriate for a moderator.

  • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    The license you’re attaching to your comments uses copyright to restrict commercial use. Are you okay with any company ignoring your license because you’ve posted it in the open?

    The term source-available is exactly what you should be using instead of open-source, as the latter has been defined differently for decades.

    The only instances I’ve seen people using the term open-source literally has been companies who wanted to benefit from positive connotations of open-source, while using a commercial source-available license which restricts many freedoms.

    Another comment: https://linkage.ds8.zone/comment/1105950

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      You’re not making much of an argument against me. I wish there were no copyright, no patents, no closed-source, no “trade secrets”, none of that. But I live in the real world, not some hedonistic, communist, kopimist fantasy.

      Copyright exists in this world and if it can maybe bring trouble to one org reaping the benefits of the commons without giving back, I’ll gladly use it. Orgs treat copyright like bumberstickers and regularly ignore that (meaning anything) which has the low chance of being enforced or have significant monetary repercussions, so I do the same.

      CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

      • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yes, I’ve no problem with your position on copyright and many institutions do many bad things. My issue js with misuse of terms with a fixed meaning, i.e. open-source. Having different people use a single term in multiple ways makes it so much more difficult to understand each other and enables bad actors to rile people up against each other.

        A tame example is “stable” Linux distros, where "stable"can mean package versions stay the same (besides bug fixes), and then people come and say their Arch Linux never broke, so it too is “stable”.

        Why wouldn’t it be open-source. It’s right there in the name: the source is open.

        In the context of criticism of how copyright works I understand the above sentence, but using a well understood term differently still annoys me enough to write lengthy comments.

        PS: I do hope lemmy implements a way to add copyright notices to comments like it allows for setting the language of posts. It could be implemented in a less noisy way. People who don’t care about a license ignore it anyway, while people who do care would likely find it without much trouble.