Show newer

@ehler @NanoRaptor Shaming neurodiverse and/or disabled folks for not meeting able neurotypical standards on topics that they may not even care about is not how you do that, however.

#Social.coop has been discussing whether to disable images on May 16 and October 10 for #WorldSightDay, as suggested here stefanbohacek.online/@stefan/1.

One concern raised about this proposal is that it is symbolic and might not do anything to improve the lives of people with visual impairments.

I would like to hear perspectives from people with visual impairments on whether this kind of action is helpful.

(boosts welcome; please only reply if you rely on alt text)

#accessibility
#a11y
#AltText

In the family we say to someone complaining that they don't want to go out in the rain: "You're not made of sugar". Is this a common thing elsewhere too?

@ck@chaos.social I'm being deliberately a bit vague here because not all of these issues are public, and I do not want to be putting other folks at risk here

@ck@chaos.social Not exactly - what I'm trying to convey is that leadership (in the Foundation sense) was interfering with leadership (in the team/subproject sense), ie. the top-down hierarchy was getting in the way of people managing their own domain of responsibility.

It's not that people didn't *want* to align and manage their domain of responsibility, it's that they did not feel safe to do so, due to a variety of issues (Eelco being one of them) that all led back to the board.

@NanoRaptor as an European I always thought that "quiet quitting" meant "do the bare minimum for not getting fired". I was surprised when I realized that American colleagues defined it as "do your job but without enthusiasm", this is what I just called "working"

@delroth I would disagree, but for reasons that I cannot publicly elaborate on

@ck@chaos.social From everything I've seen, that lack of alignment is in huge part due to Eelco's tendency to interfere in matters, and therefore nobody wanting to stick out their neck - which goes back to the leadership thing.

If there ever was a case study in "having a legal structure does not automatically safeguard your project governance", well, the situation is probably it.

It's also quite bizarre to see people *already* rewriting history to claim that the project is failing because "it's anarchic and there is no leadership" when the hierarchical side of the project *literally is the root cause of the problem*.

@roberth @samueldr The fact that Eelco needs to "be convinced" on such a regular basis is the problem here, and is exactly why he does in fact have control, regardless of what it says on paper

@serapath @freakazoid The core concept is the same, but there are different ways to deal with rebuilds (grafting vs. not), different packaging policies, and so on - just a different community with different conventions and views basically.

Not inherently worse or anything, just different :)

@freakazoid (The broader community definitely is not the problem here, the issue in NixOS governance is highly concentrated in a few people)

@freakazoid There are a number of significant differences in philosophy, is my understanding, and merging two existing communities is something that usually does not go well

A piece of advice regarding : You know how it's really difficult to find something similar to replace it with?

That also means that if worst comes to worst, a fork is very likely to happen - because there are going to be many other people *also* looking to replace it.

I would recommend not panicking yet, and instead keeping an eye out for further developments. Even if NixOS dies, that doesn't mean the community does.

:boost_requested:

@0x17 I would suggest waiting and seeing. Nix being so difficult to replace is likely to work in its favour here - with a fork being very likely.

Show older
Pixietown

Small server part of the pixie.town infrastructure. Registration is closed.