yes, lets keep things in context.
you, a person who has significant control over Pleroma, endorsed a project related to Pleroma maintained by a person who numerous people who helped to get Pleroma off the ground have significant issues with, because they are transphobic and managing the systems of other transphobic individuals.
i mean, it may come to surprise you, but many of the original Pleroma contributors are transgender.
and so, to us, the endorsement is tone-deaf and frankly a slap in the face to those contributors.
nobody is saying that mr. gleason is not allowed to do what he is doing. what we *are* saying however, is that Pleroma embracing it is a serious problem.
this isn't about "cancel culture", this is about showing solidarity with the people who made Pleroma viable to begin with.
MRF, a subsystem lauded by mr. gleason for it's flexibility in automated moderation, exists because the people slapped in the face by this action made it happen.
the fact that Pleroma is willing to embrace this person, is frankly motivated by gaining numbers at any cost, even if that means sleeping in the same bed with people who want to see many of the original Pleroma contributors die.
you want to work with Gleason, that's your business, but don't expect me to be silent about it.
@kaniini
I still think it's ironic that Gleason was nice to you and defended you while people were bullying you over your appearance, and you continue to attack and insult him.
Like all he did was have an opinion on a mental illness. Hardly something to warrant not just a single accusation, but multiple personal attacks on separate occasions.
@feld
he is not just having an opinion, he provides sysadmin services to people who are lobbying to harm our rights.
i don't give a flying fuck about his opinions; he is allowed to have whatever opinion he wishes.
the problem is when those opinions turn into actions which support those lobbying against us.
he did not have to do work for Graham Linehan, but he did. that's his cross to bear.
@kaniini
Why? Is there some sort of code-pink third wave feminist blocking mechanism hidden inside of the source code that I'm not currently aware of?
That's like saying guns are bad because they're used to murder people. Yes, they are, but they're used for good causes too, like self defense. In fact, good uses of guns are the best way to combat bad uses of guns, and I think that principle probably applies to #Soapbox.
If you think too many TERFs use #Soapbox or are in control of its direction, the least constructive thing you could possibly do is tell non TERFs to boycott it. That changes nothing, nor does it fix the "problem" you have with the project.
@feld
See:
- Footage of actual violence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_d3ozhSE-U (note: the uploader is Miranda Yardley, a gender-critical transsexual)
- Threats and glorification of violence: https://terfisaslur.com/
As far as I know there's been no case of a so-called "TERF" actually committing an act of violence against a trans person. AFAIK every known murder of a trans person has been perpetrated by a man, and most likely a homophobic man who knows *nothing* about radical feminism.
The idea that women's thoughts can make men be violent against trans people is a sexist idea.
Soapbox is a software for TERFs, by TERFs.
if we lived in a utopian society, then your assertion would be correct, but in the present society we live in, Soapbox is used in ways that are to the detriment of trans people.
and so, on a technical level, it is not bad, but on a social level, it should be considered treyf.