5 ms·

In short, let's leave politics out of this kind of stuff UNLESS the candidate is demonstrably in one of the outer circles of "unacceptable viewpoints". It's de

by GHFigs 12y ago

In short, let's leave politics out of this kind of stuff UNLESS the candidate is demonstrably in one of the outer circles of "unacceptable viewpoints". It's deeply unsettling that you refer to beliefs and viewpoints instead of speech or actions, and moreover that a person's political views are only to be scrutinized if they're minority views. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

x0x0 12y ago
that's glib nonsense there is essentially no evidence that actions are unaffected by beliefs and viewpoints, and that's precisely what you're asking us to uncritically accept Mozilla is uniquely vulnerable to political incompetence because it’s not just some corp, it’s also FOSS. It is still a FOSS project, yes? Convincing people to donate their highly-technical labor to maintain your cash cow for you is a delicate political art. Free-software contributors want, in return: a degree of control and ownership, an association with a respected brand, warm fuzzy feelings. In the USA it is routinely assumed that you don’t share the worldview of the person who signs your paycheck. (Cue: Dolly Parton soundtrack) But society interprets donations as a form of endorsement. So if your business relies on donors, you’d better make ‘em proud. -mechanical_fish
- GHFigs 12y ago
  that's glib nonsense 0. Are you sure you didn't just misunderstand what was being said? there is essentially no evidence that actions are unaffected by beliefs and viewpoints 1. I don't know how you got that from what I wrote. I was responding to a post that specifically refers to "unacceptable viewpoints", not unacceptable actions. It's the refusal to make a distinction at all that is unsettling, especially when it's being described as the proper heuristic for determining whether someone is above scrutiny or not. and that's precisely what you're asking us to uncritically accept 2. I'm not asking you to uncritically accept anything. I'm stating my personal unwillingness to uncritically accept the notion that thinking the wrong thing or having a minority point of view ought to itself a punishable offense. A person's merit is not the sum of the popularity of his beliefs.

by GHFigs 12y ago

x0x0 12y ago

that's glib nonsense there is essentially no evidence that actions are unaffected by beliefs and viewpoints, and that's precisely what you're asking us to uncritically accept Mozilla is uniquely vulnerable to political incompetence because it’s not just some corp, it’s also FOSS. It is still a FOSS project, yes? Convincing people to donate their highly-technical labor to maintain your cash cow for you is a delicate political art. Free-software contributors want, in return: a degree of control and ownership, an association with a respected brand, warm fuzzy feelings. In the USA it is routinely assumed that you don’t share the worldview of the person who signs your paycheck. (Cue: Dolly Parton soundtrack) But society interprets donations as a form of endorsement. So if your business relies on donors, you’d better make ‘em proud. -mechanical_fish

GHFigs 12y ago
that's glib nonsense 0. Are you sure you didn't just misunderstand what was being said? there is essentially no evidence that actions are unaffected by beliefs and viewpoints 1. I don't know how you got that from what I wrote. I was responding to a post that specifically refers to "unacceptable viewpoints", not unacceptable actions. It's the refusal to make a distinction at all that is unsettling, especially when it's being described as the proper heuristic for determining whether someone is above scrutiny or not. and that's precisely what you're asking us to uncritically accept 2. I'm not asking you to uncritically accept anything. I'm stating my personal unwillingness to uncritically accept the notion that thinking the wrong thing or having a minority point of view ought to itself a punishable offense. A person's merit is not the sum of the popularity of his beliefs.