Hello @fdroidorg it has come to my attention that you are hosting a barely modified version of @Tusky branded to a hateful Gab instance full of TERFs in your main repository. I suggest you nuke that app immediately if you don't want to be suspicious of supporting hatespeech.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky While you're at it, as a developer for Tusky, you'll probably have better luck than I did convincing them to take down Librem Social, which is the exact same shit designed for a different neonazi instance, as well as FreeTusky, which literally brags about removing the blocklist (of which Gab is the only one on there to my knowledge and therefore they're bragging about/promoting Gab) in their description.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky And for the record, being "suspected of hosting hate speech" is long gone thanks to how they handled these two apps. They *are* hosting hate speech, and the devs don't care.

@KitsuneAlicia yeah... I think they made up their mind and it can't be changed.

@ConnyDuck Also, isn't there some sort of way to force these three to kill off their forks with @Tusky's license? Like a clause that prevents the code from being used for harmful practices or something?

@KitsuneAlicia No there is not. This is why my next project is getting a different license.

@SevenOfNein @KitsuneAlicia I will probably try the NPL (non violent public license)

@SevenOfNein @ConnyDuck Me neither. This'll definitely come in handy in the future.

@ConnyDuck Could you provide a link to this license? I have trouble finding any information on it :)

@ConnyDuck @unicorn good luck with the change to a niche, non proven and not free software license.

@vascorsd @ConnyDuck @unicorn Freedom is only good if it's only applied to people that agree to you. It's 2019, get with the times!

@ConnyDuck @unicorn i really doubt that is enforceable, what would you do if tusky had this, sue everyone who connected to gab or another far right instance? i also think there is the potential for it to be used against antifascists, communists, anarchists
"No use for the purpose of inflicting bodily harm"
"No use for the purpose of War. (aiding or undertaking directly)"

or people who made jokes about white people or cis people or even boomers (they are not discriminated against but some of them think they are)

"No use for the purpose of discrimination or hate speech towards disadvantaged groups on the basis of...

Sexual Orientation
Gender Identity

Not to mention that any license agreement is like any other contract, it must be actually enforced in Court.

I can't imagine anybody using this license for their software actually being able to talk to a lawyer long enough to get action going.
@ConnyDuck @unicorn

@ConnyDuck @KitsuneAlicia could you change the license for future releases? Then they would be out of updates and bug fixes at least...

@MiriMayhem @KitsuneAlicia no thats also not possible since most of the 100 Tusky contributors would have to agree

@ConnyDuck its a lot of effort and you might have to rewrite some code, but in the end it might still be worth it

@MiriMayhem @KitsuneAlicia

@ConnyDuck @MiriMayhem It wouldn't hurt to ask them, at least. Unless some of them actually agree with Gab's users and their actions, it should be relatively painless to bring it up as a topic of discussion.

@KitsuneAlicia @ConnyDuck And those who disagree, their part can still be rewritten. better than rewriting everything

@KitsuneAlicia @ConnyDuck @Tusky Nope. Not unless the license has language in it saying these restrictions.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg How about stop harassing the hard working devs at F-Droid, If you think forks of your software are "hate speech" then you shouldn't be involved with free software In the first place.

@Main_Tomato @ConnyDuck @fdroidorg He thinks those forks are supporting gab, which they are, and that gab supports and promotes hate speech, which it does.

If you think writing free software means you need to be fine with that, then maybe your idea of free software is not actually worth much.

@Main_Tomato 💿 the fork serves no purpose other than to be branded towards a specific instance which hosts and encourages hate speech.

this is not "forks are hate speech" this is "forking something to cater to hate speech is supporting hate speech"

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky well obviously the second checkbox is wrong as you are not fine with the merge. Shouldn't that be sufficient?

@sandzwerg @fdroidorg I think the checkbox does not mean the Tusky team but the creator of the fork

@sandzwerg @ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky no, the original app author isn't ConnyDuck, it's socjustwiz, since this is a fork of the app.

Now, whether a low-effort rebranded fork should be included is another question. Remove everything other than FreeTusky IMO, since it's the superior version of the app without and branding for particular instances.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky fdroid has already proven that they dont care about promoting hate speech and fascism. We were already talking months ago about forking fdroid.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky You should comment on the issue that you dont want this in the repo. They didnt include Signal because the developer didnt like it. But anyway I expect them to ignore you.

@ConnyDuck I'm kind of conflicted on this one - between the slow updates/technical issues (and honestly, I'm OK with those on their own because I know they're recompiling things, it's all volunteer, etc.) and this sort of complicity, it's like... what, do I go back to Google Play? Sure, Google is evil, but are they better at moderating this kind of crap?

Or is this going to be like the LibreOffice split where we're gonna have to fork and do it better?

@kithop @ConnyDuck Neither -- F-Droid as a distribution platform is... not exactly FEDERATED, but can get its package lists from an arbitrary number of arbitrary repos.

So the move here would be to get a community together hosting their own repo(s), curating their apps there, and deleting the mainline F-Droid repos, until that community is big enough to maintain development of the whole F-Droid project itself (and then formally forking can be a detail).

@kithop @ConnyDuck The work they do to recompile can be saved by copying the APKs -- and that would be signed by the f-droid project key, but that's still workable.

And possibly advocate for more community-management-useful features, e.g. a (toggleable per repo, default off) moderator-approved-before-publically-viewable review system infrastructured around individual repos.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky F-Droid out there again showing us that spreading FOSS is just as important to them as helping to amplify hate speech communities' access to the wider world.
Slow claps all around. Like clockwork, next will come their irresponsible shrugs at the damage they're doing to the FOSS community's image as they wave their hate wares out to the world screaming "but it's freedom!" Well done, I could set my watch by you. Surprise me this time and do the right thing, I dare you.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky Didn't the Tusky devs used to say "if you don't like the ban, maintain your own fork that doesn't ban those instances! it's free software!"? Then people started doing that, because reasonable people don't really like censorship. And now you're complaining that people are doing what the Tusky devs told them to do.

If you don't like Gab, that's fine. You can block all comments from their accounts on your own account. There's no need to continuously try and force everyone in the world to adhere to your exact worldview.

@tyil there is a difference between "not having my exact worldview" and supporting hateful groups.

@ConnyDuck There isn't when "supporting hateful groups" is your interpretation of letting people have differing opinions. Not everything you disagree with is "hateful" by default. Understanding instead of silencing would go a long way to improve the situation.
@ConnyDuck And don't forget, the Fediverse allows you to just block people and whole instances if you prefer to treat people as a group instead of individuals. There's already entire groups of instances that block Gab completely. Why not just hop on there if you really can't stand this idea of people existing on different parts of the political spectrum?
@ConnyDuck I expected nothing less from someone that considers everyone he disagrees with "hateful".

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky I noticed this this morning.

They didn't even fully change the branding - only the app icon and the app name. The details page shows a “Tusky” banner, the description refers exclusively to “Tusky”.

Even if they're not up for removing Gab-aligned micro-forks of a project you'd think they'd be ok with removing such a zero-effort waste of space! Why have an approvals process at all if “we literally just changed the name and icon” is an acceptable app?

@RAOF @ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky

1. There are now hundreds of Tusky forks out there doing all the same thing with the exact same features and most of them saying "Muh, but blocking Gab is bad". Guys, this is a Mastodon client. Even the people at Pleroma had luck getting Tusky to work with it.

2. I would be totally fine as a contributor if Tusky switched to the NPL.

3. Also imagine this as a developer: do you want your software to be used to organize mass murders? I don't think so.

@ConnyDuck @Tusky I gave up on @fdroidorg when someone posted a Breitbart article in the forum and nobody batted an eyelash. Time to move on.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky F-droid is great, but I wish the maintainers would grow a backbone when it comes to handling this type of app. Free Software is not supposed to be about claiming to be apolitical while enabling hate sites to run their ops smoothly.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky I've got some bad news for you about my past experience with F-Droid

@ben @ConnyDuck @brainblasted Heh. Way ahead of you, Ben. I already went through the experience in the replies when I saw the post yesterday.

What, you mean where the both of you spam the forums and gitlab with the same tired arguments, then completely retcon everything you said and meant the moment everyone calls you on it, and then deny saying things, and then get shown block quotes where you say the things you denied saying?

If so, just show the links.

@ConnyDuck @fdroidorg @Tusky Wait – Tusky supports every imaginable "wrongdoing instances" other than that paticular one :troll: ?! So… there is a version without a mandatory blocklist you say? I'm all in then. I, too appreciate to decide what to read or not read, thanks. 🙂

@ConnyDuck im tired of seeing the aftereffects of your temper tantrums cluttering up my home timeline. please commit suicide.
@ConnyDuck @Tusky @fdroidorg

> suspected of wrongthink

hmm i'm no fan of gab or spinster, but this is a little much
Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!