[maxbond]

You can't slander them by saying they're throwing a tantrum, without even talking about what parts of the document you're referring to or why it is you feel that way, and then decry how they're not giving anyone the benefit of the doubt. That is pearl clutching.

Writing them to resolve this issue in good faith, is giving them the benefit of the doubt.

[ianbutler]

Outsider opinion:

So I think the entire doc as a first step in supposed good communication is in bad faith. Bringing this out into the public, and being on the front page of HN makes it seem like a stunt, and for pressure, not a good faith plea. I feel like a private conversation between the concerned parties should have happened first, and if it did that should have been mentioned. If that didn't work then maybe make it public for pressure, and then fork (and or consider legal action to get the trademarks if there's grounds idk not a lawyer).

If people's idea of good first step communication is to create a public letter with accusatory undertones and get it plastered places, I don't want to work with those people. They went from 0mph to 120mph way too quickly.

[rapnie]

> I feel like a private conversation between the concerned parties should have happened first

With a dispersed community that used to work in public, against the company owners who secretly prepared this since at least March this year (likely longer) and not even informed their own maintainers properly in the private channel they have for that.

[ianbutler]

So I think saying it's all of the community is a little generous, it's like 20 people who've signed, and yes even then. A private conversation should have happened. As an outsider, that's a hearsay situation to me so forgive me if I don't outright trust the intentions of the small group of people who put out this letter, I don't know anything about them.

And if the situation actually is as nefarious as you say it is, with communication having broken down, the letter should have called that out directly instead of being wishy washy. If people feel that strongly about it not being a mistake, time to use strong language and lay out all the facts.

[rapnie]

> So I think saying it's all of the community is a little generous

Indeed, most of the community isn't easily reached. Hence the open letter and the ability to sign. I see the open letter as an invitation to have these conversations. But this time according to community processes and in the open.

[throwaccount12]

I am an outsider as well, and I researched the person who wrote this letter, and he has a company that sells Gitea and is not a maintainer. This letter is in bad faith like you said.

[rapnie]

Note that it is also in bad faith to post these accusations without references and with a throwaway account. Did one person create this letter? What is this company? I am not aware of any that sell Gitea.

[sangnoir]

Talk about "feeding the outrage machine". The irony is thick in this thread wirh people who are outraged by "outrage culture", without being specific (trademarks and website, and the broken promise on community ownership of these assets). Even the current top comment complains in the abstract - people have become what they hate as they fight the culture wars.