Recent searches
Search options
@aud (And it’s not just IBM either although they are likely one of the largest benefactors… Canonical and other companies also ship operating systems based on these components. Meanwhile, everyone has been happily ignoring the elephant in the room while cycle after cycle of development focusses on other things. But woe be it if you point out the ableism in that.)
I know you mean well, but... is it really reasonable to shame anyone for not having implemented certain important features in a program, if you haven't implemented those features in that program either? that they're busy with other things as much as you are, and you call them out as ableist, does that make you a virtue-signalling ableist? it sounds like you're trying to impose your standards on others, and that's not how free software dynamics work, as you know. if I were to demand you to implement features that are important or even essential to me, while you're already struggling to get to other features you identify as strategically more urgent, budgeted and planned, would you find that cool? screaming and shaming might compel others to tend to issues you care about, but it's still a form of coercion. IMHO that's not really cool, even if well-meaning and caring.
my response is probably easy to throw rocks at, but really, my point is that, though you're right that they haven't, like, cared enough to implement or fix those features for years, and you label them ableist for that, you haven't cared enough to implement or fix them either, but you don't label yourself ableist. free software doesn't really have owners, and they don't really owe us anything for us to demand them to work on any features we care about. we show our caring by contributing those features, or enticing others to contribute them. I'm not convinced that shaming is a cool way to entice.