1d ago

Ubuntu Council corrects forum moderator's interpretation of rules relating to queerness

web.archive.org

On Discourse rules about politics

Was surprised no one bothered to post this give how big of a reaction this story got.

Wanted to post the update and correction cause that deserves to be seen just as much. This seems like a reasonable, thoughtful handling of the issue.

I still don't really wanna use Ubuntu though 😅

Linux @programming.dev

cm0002 @lemmy.world

1d ago

Ubuntu Council corrects forum moderator's interpretation of rules relating to queerness

web.archive.org /web/20250908151805/https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/on-discourse-rules-about-politics/66986

19 comments

Note that both the community council and most moderators are volunteers not employed by Canonical.
i wish i could understand why people would volunteer their time for a for-profit corporation.
I don't get the hate for Ubuntu. It's easy to use, and there is nothing nasty you are forced to use, e.g. you can choose how much non-foss stuff you want to install, analytics are opt-in, etc.
- Snaps made me personally stop using Ubuntu.
  I just went back to Debian and I'm happy.
- The initial thing that gave me the ick was when Amazon was integrated into their search for money.
  Unity is also pretty bad. Laggy, weird, and it just isn't cool looking
  I run kubuntu and Ubuntu server on a couple of my machines, so I am not a total hater, but lately I've been moving to other distros.
  
  One thing I really miss from Unity is the efficient use of the top bar doubling as a title bar for full screen windows. I wish modern DEs would do this.
- Honestly, I don’t think Snaps are so bad. Canonical’s top market is enterprise, and Snaps are ideal for deploying applications in these environments. If you’re an end-user, you can literally just uninstall the runtime
  
  Snaps are bad for two reasons:
  The backend is proprietary & the client doesn't support other backends without modifying the source code
  For some packages, doing apt install installs the Snap instead
  There's no good reason for either. Canonical is simply setting things up so they can squeeze money out of their users by enshittifying over time.
  
  they're also great for software bom's
- I think they've had a number of controversies over the years, but I think the big frustration people have at the moment is really just that snaps are kind of a crummy thing in several respects, don't have an open source backend, and often don't work as well as flatpaks (to my understanding)
  The increasing commitment to going down that path is a big turn off for many, and disqualifying for some.
  That being said, I have used and been happy with Ubuntu in the past. I think some of the dislike is just motivated by "thing popular", especially since it's so popular with folks new to linux who are still figuring things out
  
  Just here to add that, yes, Snaps are very broken. Do not use them if you value your time or well-being.
  The annoying thing is that Canonical dishonestly co-opts your apt invocations for snap installations, so you're likely to waste hours of your life trying to figure out why the thing you installed doesn't work or takes forever to launch randomly. And they keep Snapifying more of their distro, so even things like GNOME packages are only available as Snaps.
Bruh it literally happened this afternoon, chill.
Also, the direct link is more readable: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/on-discourse-rules-about-politics/66986 The archive page strips some of the formatting.
- Ah, that's fair, between ADHD and my sleep disorder my sense of time is pretty dysfunctional 😅
  For me it was yesterday, I didn't process that not even a day had passed for folks without my weird sleep schedule
  
  The update was also posted in the original thread
Why the fuck does an operating system have ANY rules relating to queerness?
- Edit: why are y'all downvoting them for being out of the loop?? Lemmy get your shit together
  They don't- a moderator to an online ubuntu forum community (that recently became official) misapplied a rule about keeping things apolitical as meaning someone shouldn't describe themselves as queer.
  Ubuntu has made a statement correcting the interpretation made by the moderator
- Ubuntu has a diversity policy to explicitly welcome and encourage participation, mentioning that they explicitly honor diversity in sexual orientation among other things. It does not explicitly mention queerness.
  A moderator made a bad a call. It sounds like there may have been some confusion about the word queer used as a slur vs a self-identification.

19 comments