[jjmarr]

In the prior words[1] of Gusted, one of the board members that announced the ban:

> This is not a neutral space, Codeberg is political. If you disagree with someone, be constructive and don't call them merely political and think that's a reason for the discussion to stop.

[1] https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/2184#issuecom...

[zarzavat]

Pretending to run an inclusive git hosting service for FOSS and then attacking your own users because their code is the wrong type of algorithm isn't politics, it's just being an asshole.

[tkel]

Kinda seems like you're doing the exact thing the parent comment is talking about, except in addition to laundering your disagreement through the lens of "politics", you're just adding the word "asshole".

[ShinyLeftPad]

Run your own Codeberg instance with blackjack and hookers, it's open source.

[zelias]

You know what, forget the Codeberg instance!

[whateveracct]

i'm sure the guy you're replying to also wants to "legalize comedy"

[hparadiz]

At that point I'm running gitlab. It's better anyway.

[pibaker]

Unless you really need some of its features, self hosting gitlab always felt like an exercise in maximizing hosting bills.

[tbrownaw]

> Pretending

Are they though? I see "We are more than just Git hosting: Our community is ..." right in the highlight box on their landing page.

[birksherty]

Nope. It's not "attacking own user base". These comments are ridiculous now. It's safeguarding a open project by removing scammers and abusers that exploit it. Scammer should host their own or use github.

[zarzavat]

Banning projects that haven't done anything wrong except implement algorithms that the Karen committee disagrees with is clearly an attack.

If they want to ban scammers then why don't they just ban scammers instead of a blanket policy that bans legitimate projects as well?

[TaLiTr]

Implying that anyone who makes crypto or AI projects is somehow a scammer/abuser?

[acedTrex]

> Pretending to run an inclusive git hosting service

They are not trying to run an inclusive service.

[fzeroracer]

Their own users voted for this.

[p-e-w]

So what is Codeberg’s political stance? From which ideology does it follow that crypto projects are bad, but VPN projects are not, for example?

[andor]

VPNs are generic networking/security tools that can also be used for things like circumventing geoblocking.

Cryptocurrency doesn’t have a lot of use cases outside of money laundering, avoiding sanctions and stealing money through rug pulls.

[p-e-w]

That doesn’t answer the question. What is the underlying ideology/value system? Lots of people would disagree with your second claim, so if that’s what they believe then this itself implies all kinds of nonstandard values.

[inigyou]

I believe it's agreement of a majority of voters.

[p-e-w]

So mob rule by whichever busybodies buy into the inner circle, with no fundamental principles whatsoever? Ugh.

[joepie91_]

Just because the fundamental principles cannot trivially be summarized into a single sentence, doesn't mean they don't exist. It's a member association, and the fundamental principles form organically from its membership. That's... how social groups work.

[inigyou]

Welcome to the world. Things do not magically happen, they are done by people. If you want something done right you have to do it yourself. To lessen the load you could also form or join a group of people who want it done the same way.

[fishgoesblub]

> Cryptocurrency doesn’t have a lot of use cases outside of money laundering, avoiding sanctions and stealing money through rug pulls.

Very similar things can be said about VPNs. Seeing only the bad to justify banning an entire category is terrible.

[squigz]

Most people, and indeed groups of people, are far more complex than to be able to say "all my politics flow from this one ideology"