Isolating up is the opposite of interesting to me.

What's clear is they mediating all selection choice and interest through pressure points of a single fixed trust board is of limited use going forward. I don't think the vouches and other web of trusts tackle the actual root need to disaggregate, decentralize.

You can anti-social open source, reject, flee to nihil and going away, solo-ing. I think that's mad bad and dumb; just my judgement call. I agree strongly with v-it, open source is social. It's interesting and fascinating to open your mind. These other signals are fascinating. The glut of goodness is something we should firehose better, not shy from. https://v-it.org/

▲

cwillu 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I care about what my best friend finds interesting. I care about what the people I willingly interact with daily find interesting. I categorically do not care what jauntywundrkind finds interesting, and if that bothers them, they're welcome to not use the little knickknacks I make for my friends; the license permits that.

This is not antisocial.

	▲	OhMeadhbh 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I have a friend who points out that in the FOSS community, fork == drama. Either the drama causes the fork or the fork causes drama. What you describe sounds more anti-drama than anti-social.
	▲	jauntywundrkind 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Then our interests align! Great, fantastic, glad you are on board. You didn't talk about being interested in what maintainers were up to. You talked about what your friends are interested in! That's the thing! We need to decentralize the decision making. If your friend is juggling some patches, some feature branches atop code you use, that is interesting. We seem to both agree that we do want to have interest & awareness. We've only had one model for social ness ever and it's created enormous pinch-points, enormous thin-waist problems for getting stuff done. The maintainers themselves keep saying they can't handle the loads, don't enjoy it, don't want to. I think the submission is kind of a bad spirited loser but I'm sympathetic! I just think it's worth exploring pro social options before we all default to shutting down turning off all the exterior signals and going dark, like suggested. That sounds a lot like being a loser to me. Fine, do you! It sucks though, it really does. Everyone should hope aspire to & work for better. Let's discuss what that might look like.

▲

locknitpicker an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> You can anti-social open source, reject, flee to nihil and going away, solo-ing. I think that's mad bad and dumb; just my judgement call.

I don't think this opinion was thought all the way through. Think about this: you are a developer who worked on a small library for fun. You decided to release it because it's cool and you are proud of it and perhaps someone else might find it useful as well. Should this bound you to spend any of your personal time appeasing any whim from low-effort but highly opinionated random people who happened to come across the project? Should you now be forced to take time out of your day to do what amounts to customer support requests? If not, should you be pressured to unshare your code?

Listen, if you are so hell bent on doing all that work then please fork the project and take over those tasks. How come the expectation is always that others should do all the work that you wish to benefit from?

	▲	jauntywundrkind 34 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I literally discussed a tool for socializing how to share things without gating a maintainer.

▲

ValdikSS 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]