Title of the (concerning) thread on their community forum, not voluntary clickbait. Came across the thread thanks to a toot by @Khrys@mamot.fr (French speaking)
The gist of the issue raised by OP is that framework sponsors and promotes projects lead by known toxic and racists people (DHH among them).
I agree with the point made by the OP :
The “big tent” argument works fine if everyone plays by some basic civil rules of understanding. Stuff like code of conducts, moderation, anti-racism, surely those things we agree on? A big tent won’t work if you let in people that want to exterminate the others.
I’m disappointed in framework’s answer so far
Isn’t that a good thing?
I don’t know about you, but I don’t really care what the views of the owners of a business are. It only becomes a problem if they make those views plain.
I very much care about the view of business owners are; it’s how I decide to where my “vote” goes when I “vote with my wallet” as I’ve frequently told to do by Capitalism supporters.
Voting with your wallet has nothing to do with politics, but price, quality, and service.
Voting is wielding political power, whether it is with your wallet or anything else.
It doesn’t have to be, and that’s my point.
Using your wallet doesn’t have to be political.
Voting is, by definition, political. It is a common part of several different methods of resolving coordination problems (i.e. politics).
No, voting is only political if it’s part of a political process. Everyone in a group voting what kind of pizza to order isn’t political, and it can merely be informative (e.g. the person ordering the pizza could pick something else). Voting is only political when it involves government.
“Voting with your wallet” a metaphor. It just means changing your shopping habits so a company loses revenue, usually due to a recent change. Maybe it’s a policy you don’t like, or maybe it’s a drop in quality or something. It’s usually not a political act, though it can occasionally impact political policy (e.g. if the boycott is in response to a political change that involves the target company).
Yes, it literally is. That’s what politics is: how we control group behavior.
No, politics is specifically concerned with government. Any other use is generally a metaphor for government, like “office politics.” Voting on what food to get for dinner isn’t “politics,” neither is boycotting a store for treating their employees poorly.
Well, I guess he has tried to make his views fairly plain on his blog. it’s just a bit hard to find unless you’re looking for it
Were the views associated with the company? Or was it purely a personal blog?
The distinction matters. Many people are able to separate business from politics, but some are not. The former aren’t a concern, the latter definitely are.
Wow I guess if you have to scroll all the way to the fifth whole link it can’t possibly be plain, can it?
Sure the business owner thinks anyone who isn’t white doesn’t count as a person, but he only uses the resources you give him to promote that point of view as a hobby, so why worry?
I don’t know, was it a personal blog, some social media post, or a page on the company’s website? You didn’t specify, and I honestly don’t care enough to try to replicate your search.
If they’re able to separate personal views from how they run their company, it shouldn’t really matter what those views are.
It’s literally in the post you’re responding to. I didn’t do any external research other than read the thread.
This is the part I’m talking about:
You are not the person I originally responded to, how would you know they were referencing the OP? There aren’t even 5 links in the article, and if we count the embedded X posts, the fifth link is about Hyprland. I’m pretty sure that’s not what the OP is referring to.
The OP’s point is that it’s hard to find info on these people’s views, and the links in the OP are from other people doing that digging. As in, we likely wouldn’t know their views if these bloggers didn’t dig through posts looking for it.
Tbh I’m not sure what you’re saying here. Person said they had to scroll down 5 results to get to the asshole being an asshole and seemed to think that was proof it’s hard to research (hence my “five whole links”) and then you seemed to be saying that since it’s “hard to find” and the business isn’t slapping a nazi flag front and center on their website means it’s fine to use their stuff. If that’s not what you meant, great. But you said the same thing again, so I’m pretty sure you meant it.
I’m saying that there’s a good chance Framework didn’t know the views of those projects when they donated, so ascribing those views to framework doesn’t make logical sense. That’s all.
Ok but then they reaffirmed their commitment to a big tent.
You mean big tent politics? That’s inevitable with a 2-party system.
That said, theyade a donation to FOSS projects and FOSS shouldn’t be political.
Even then, who cares tbh.
People who don’t want to give resources to white nationalists. Why do you support funding white nationalists?
You’re not funding white nationalists (if that’s what these people are, I have zero idea who they are), you’re funding the product they’re making.
If I send you a dollar and you send 50c to white nationalists and then you tell me that and I give you another dollar, now I am funding white nationalists. This isn’t complex. Knowledge+action = result.