They have no idea what "slop" is. They don't want to have to define it with any precision. Ironically, these rules will be enforced based on vibes.

Maybe you shouldn’t use a platform that lets the users vote on policy then?

> The second vote was more controversial, but was also accepted with 358 agreements vs 144 disagreements (and 14 abstentions), with a high voter turn-out of around 50% of active members.

I mean, that's your right, but also they'll get new users too. So much of the internet is drowning in slop that any place that's still brimming with original content will likely see its stock go up, and will tend to attract people who still do original work, creating a virtuous cycle

No, you want to be able to host whatever code, not kicked off based on whatever the hate train is on to today.

> On the other hand this will definitely devolve into name calling and vigilantism.

No doubt. Just look at Lobsters.

A quality filter would have been more effective.

> To completely ban vibe coded projects just limits the number of users that will use them.

here lies the fundamental misunderstanding by many people in this thread.

Is the objective of Codeberg to host as many projects as possible on its own server? I do not believe so!

The question then becomes "what is Codeberg's objectives?"

It's not to become the world's largest code forge instance! It's to build a set of FOSS tools for FOSS software development. Look at [0], for example, which lists alternatives.

But perhaps most importantly, the FOSS tooling can be self hosted, right? There's still a notion of freedom there.

[0] https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/#...

I think you're right, quotas have been around as long as multi-user systems.

Their argument was economic, an economic solution would be good:

"It seems like many ‘vibe coders’ don't realize that they don't actually have a community around them. They build projects as if they had, and spend resources accordingly. We see projects having a lot of code activity, heavy CI/CD testing, frequent and large release binaries. Sometimes, it feels like the amount of supported platforms exceeds the amount of actual users.

To us, it seems ridiculous to see projects with a single developer and virtually no users consuming as much or even more resources than some of the largest community projects on Codeberg, which operate frugal with CI/CD and storage resources. We do not believe it is reasonable for Codeberg to invest our precious donation money into hosting of large ghost projects"

Ultimately, democracy is a respectable form of government and the group is free to change their mind later.

> Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them.

Well, they kinda do? Go on the main page, it's the second line of text: "Codeberg is a non-profit, community-led effort that provides services to free and open-source projects...". They're community-led, and this was a community decision.

> If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them

What do you want to see then? They've made a blog post about vibecoded with detailed explanations [1], a public banner mentioning they no longer allow cryptocurrency projects and restricting LLM content and with a link to the changelog with the differences in terms of use [2].

Should hackernews also mention that allowed content is dependent on its moderators with vaguely defined ideologies?

[1]: https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-... [2]: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/compare/17bdb39b0c1ecd0e42...

> The ban on “vibecoded” projects is effectively an invitation to start witch hunts.

It's a guarantee. Those witch hunts will happen now that those opposed to LLMs have official approval.

> If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them.

So far it is now (unofficially) The hoster of Human-made™ non-crypto™ Free Software so far it is fully legal under the jurisdiction or country it resides in (Germany).

Did they, though? Do we have numbers on how many cryptocurrency projects were removed from Codeberg because of this, since GitHub is the default choice? Or are you suggesting that there is going to be a significant split because of this?

I agree that this is probably going to cause some fragmentation, but I'm not convinced that it will do so in a meaningful matter or at the scale at which it is problematic to the free and open source ecosystem.

For what it's worth, Forgejo is working on federation[1], which might address your networking effect concerns?

[1]: https://forgejo.org/2026-05-monthly-report/#federation

Good. That's how FOSS is supposed to work.

Codeberg isn't competing against Github for market share, it serves a specific demographic with a specific ideology. Anyone is welcome to use any other host they want for their crypto and AI projects, with whatever policies align with their preferences. Or make your own with blackjack and hookers.

There shouldn't even be "default choices" or "huge network effects" in FOSS anyway. That's just another form of centralization.

Yes yes yes, we know. Git is decentralised, you can just trivially push* anywhere!

* - the code. Just the code. only the code. Nothing but the code. You don't need the issues, the roadmap, the ACL of which human can do what, the API access keys for third parties, the artifact repos. Just. The. Code.

Somewhat arsey in my tone? Yeah. But having done two large scale (100+ repos) forge migrations of our company's client projects (SVN -> github, then later on github -> bitbucket) and seeing people completely ignore the metadata surrounding the code that isn't as easy to "just push" anywhere, somewhat justified.