Just a thought on a forum moderation

Hello @FranklyFlawless. I hope I find you well. I just wanted to drop my 2c about closing the topic.

Of course there’s no doubt it’s off topic.

But… I strongly believe that by closing it with only OP and your comment is an advertisement for canceling culture. In this state It almost could be interpreted as you allowed only one side of the story to be heard.

So, I think it’s better to delete it completely but to leave it in this state. I would react the same when the topic would be about donating to the far left, with the call to boycott the software.

Cheers

Deleting would be reframed as enforcing censorship or an attack against freedom of speech, and those topics have already been dragged into the dirt around these parts:

Closing topics allow the reasoning to be visible, and it is very obvious what the reasoning is, you already spelled it out for everyone. Unlisting the topic could allow for hidden discussions instead, but then it would not be about Qubes OS at all and start off with a political opening that can easily divide communities.

Thanks. I just thought it’s a waste to open new topic about about the closed topic. I wished I dropped my message there, instead, before closing.

Nevertheless, as I said, just a 2c, not a suggestion, or even worse an objection.

If, for whatever reason, you do want to follow up with the off-topic discussion, you can transfer it as a topic in the Privacy Guides Community:

Their community is not solely dedicated to Qubes OS, so they can engage with political content, but I cannot guarantee it will ever lead into anything organized or any meaningful resistance, even from an individual perspective. If anything, it will likely divide the community even further because the discussion is structured to take sides.

When the one reads my OP, the one could realize that at least I am aware it’s not about right vs. left, but about us vs. them

It shouldn’t be horizontal, but vertical division. All of us vs a handful of them with a huge (money) power. But the truth is the most powerful tool/weapon,

That’s why I use Qubes: it’s not Qubes against other distros. It’s us vs majors.

It’s perfectly fine to discuss a moderation decision but it is not acceptable to use this allowed topic as a way to comment on the closed topic. @FranklyFlawless took a decision for good reasons, so I’m merging every off-topic comment to the closed thread.

If one has concerns about Qubes OS, please open a new topic with specific concerns. For generic VPN suggestions, a link to the Privacy guides community has been provided.

This original post was made shortly after the original incident as was made out of frustration from forgetting not to let things on the internet bother me. It was originally more pointed and used hyperbole and was in part guilty of some of the exact things I ranted against. I originally wanted to delete it, but instead I decided to spend the extra time and clean up my loose language and hyperbole in the hopes that that would be a better response. The original was long and the edit even longer, and I have limited time so it won’t be perfect. I ask that if you read this you not let these things distract you from the substance of what I was trying to say.


I remember when this forum was an active, technical forum where technical support was given and productive conversations were had about the future of Qubes. In a way I should be happy, since the recent downtick in technical discussion and uptick in less productive discussion are markers of how user-friendly Qubes has become. But I would like the old forum back because it was one of the last places left where I could find useful technical discussion with minimal drama. I’m talking to those who have contributed to this decline; you know who you are on this forum. This is in regards to the general problems with people posting drama/inappropriately and with unfounded attacks on the mods, but specifically in response to the most recent example Mullvad VPN co-owner gives ~$500k USD to far right Swedish party and its subsequent drama.

This is my opinion and I’m speaking only for me, but I hope you listen. I’ve said it before and I’ll continue to say it: this forum is not the place for politics inasmuch as they do not directly pertain to technical matters, privacy, security, or another very closely related thing AND Qubes. It’s not the place for partisanship. It’s not the place for you to twist this into your narrative. It’s not the place for left, right, center, or anything that’s not technical. It’s great to say for instance that age verification is bad. Why? Because that’s not left, right, or center. It’s about the invasion of privacy and that it’s just a universally bad, technically incompetent idea. (The relation to Qubes is that OS-level verification is being pushed, which directly affects Qubes.)

It’s also not the place for personal attacks. Even if the owner of Mullvad were an actual “I believe in concentration camps” Nazi, it doesn’t change the fact that Mullvad VPN is a very technically high-quality VPN app/service with a great set of features that I personally have only seen competition on from IVPN. Mullvad VPN has not only taken no actions that would actively harm its users and has taken many actions to protect its users that weren’t expected of it. (This isn’t meant to be a Mullvad advert, just addressing how fragile the argument of the OP of the referenced thread is.) It’s not that it’s not a valid thing to be concerned about a company whose leadership may act in ways that affect you. It’s that you’ve made implied accusations (that Mullvad is compromised) that are flatly false, to the best knowledge of anyone I know. That makes it personal: about beliefs and politics and not about the actual technical efforts or actual content or intent of the programs/services they offer on a forum that is about the technical things related to Qubes. You’ve not only made it personal, and that has no place here, but you’re basically discussing cheese pizza on a forum dedicated to steel manufacturing. Absolutely discuss it on some other relevant place! Say how he’s such a bad person for a donation he made in his personal time and his own money! Say how no one should ever touch any company he’s ever worked at ever again because of it! Just don’t do it here. (I’m not actually supporting these things, just pointing out how ridiculous it sounds.) This place is for discussing the actual facts as they relate to Qubes.

I, for one, have very strong beliefs on a great many of controversial subjects. I’m not really on any other forums near to the degree I am here. I am tempted often to give my opinion on many of these matters. I can sympathize with the desire to do that. But there is a right place to do that, and here isn’t it. It’s especially not the place to make inflammatory statements based on your personal opinions and beliefs. It’s not about if what he supports is good or bad. There are people I don’t like, and products I stay away from because I don’t agree with the political direction of the company. But these people have the exact same right to their opinions as you and I do. If for some reason you have to discuss it, just follow the simple guidelines of not speaking ill of anyone not guilty of a specific, directly harmful offense and keeping to as neutral of tone as appropriate. Here’s an example: “I don’t like the political direction of someone in leadership at Mullvad VPN. Can someone make another recommendation and guide for that VPN to accommodate me?” You’ve expressed your exact same opinion, but it’s in a polite tone and it’s not inflammatory. It may get closed because it’s not about Qubes, but now instead of causing problems and division, you’re just off-topic and hopefully willing to listen to the mods when they tell you so. It’s THAT simple.

On the subject of mod censorship:
These people are giving of their time and energy for free to help this forum thrive. Their job is literally to censor, and you won’t always agree. I don’t always like their choices, but I’m not volunteering hours of my time to prove myself, become a mod, and then to do it consistently to do it better either, am I?

Again, the theme here is not that you can’t say what you want. It’s “keep it appropriate or do it somewhere else” and “don’t be a jerk.” So, if you don’t like a mod decision or direction, just DM them. Just ask what they were intending and say what you think in a polite way. and listen to what they say. They have been very helpful and understanding with me, and approaching them politely and humbly goes a long way in getting that treatment. And if you think they’re doing something wrong and approach them nicely, then they’ll make reasonable accommodations for you. If they don’t, they probably have a good reason and you should try being humble about it. If they give you a problem personally or as a group, try to handle it personally or as a group. Then escalate. There’s also no problem with creating a thread about how you don’t like the overall moderation theme. But don’t do it by personally attacking the mods by calling them feds over evidence that could equally be explained by them holding a different opinion than you or by controlling how things are done so that the forum is kept neat and tidy. If you have a post that’s been moderated, DM the mod(s) and ask what you can do to raise it in an appropriate way. I personally guarantee that they will tell you the exact reason your post was moderated and what you can do to post it OR that your post was wholly inappropriate and this isn’t the place. They may even tell you a good forum to talk about it.

Let’s take the example of Intel’s ME. Someone (I don’t remember who and it doesn’t matter. I’m not picking on them, just using their mistake as an example) a short while back complained publicly that mods were silencing discussion on Intel ME. They ignored the fact that there has been incessant discussion on the forum about it. They ignored the fact that recent discussion has said nothing new and had gotten off-topic for Qubes. They ignored that mods aren’t disallowing the topic, but that they want it contained to existing threads. The fact was, that mods weren’t silencing the discussion at all, but that they were managing the forum and preventing one topic from commandeering it. In other words, they were doing exactly what they should.

I’m not defending the mods because I’m bootlicking. It’s not even because I agree with them. In fact, there is at least one point of the CoC that I cannot stand. And to be perfectly frank, I’ve heavily debated in the past severing ties to Qubes entirely over my differences. It’s a big deal to me and makes me uneasy with the forum–and the entire project to a smaller degree–to this day. Including any/all mod decisions that have come of it, and there have been some. The most recent of which, a while back, almost caused me to post hastily and burn bridges. But I ended up keeping my cool and went on with my life for the same reason I’m defending the mods. Because they put in the work–good work, and consistently–to make something that I use and depend on that no one else provides. So I practice gratitude and perspective-shifting to see things from their side. And a surprising amount of times, it looks different from their side and I often learn it’s at the very least more complex than it seems. It certainly often prevents me from acting like an utter fool from not considering the full circumstances.

The bottom line is that they are doing their best trying to make the best overall decisions for the forum. Take the example of Maybe is a good idea to open an offtopic category on forum?. (Sorry to pick on the OP here. It isn’t personal, you’re just a good example that I remembered first due to recency.) The OP in that topic wants an offtopic category and one of his arguments amounts to basically “I don’t like that only a few people decided this, so it should be opened to a vote.” That’s a terrible argument because it addresses absolutely zero of the problems and is an essentially a dignified “but I want it my way.” It outright ignores the fact that moderation is a finite resource that is consumed in quantity at will. In other words, people can take however much they want, but there’s only so much to go around. The OP is making requests with a large demand on a resource that is already strained in this forum. A later poster, @kuhbs, has much better points, but they still don’t address a single part of the issues that prevent. To his credit, he does at least acknowledge the main problem of moderation man-hours, but he dismisses something way more of a problem than he realizes:

Moderation is a human element in this forum and the mods here put quite a lot of effort into actually trying to make this forum open and friendly within the rules. They weigh whether threads should be closed versus unlisted, they provide in-depth reasoning when put on mock trial by unhappy recipients of moderation (and those of like mind to them) just the same as they do to good-faith questions about how their moderation is affecting the overall well-being of the forum. They offer specific guidance on moderated posts. The main reasons I’m defending the mods are because they are keeping this forum alive by contributing of their free time and built reputation, and they’re doing a good job overall. That deserves recognition and respect. The other main reason is because I genuinely believe that some people simply won’t listen to the mods because they have a personal problem with them or the moderation in general, and maybe hearing from a neutral third party will help them see the larger picture. For the record, I was all in favor of a very controlled offtopic category for general Linux on Qubes, since many new users will need help with Linux and won’t know the difference. I will still suggest it, but now my focus will be almost explicitly on how to address moderation with minimal impact on current resources, if possible.

It’s the same thing with bringing politics to the forum. Mods have to be neutral because as soon as they say their opinion, they cease to be as effective of a mod because they just lost the respect of about half the population of people who believe that holding a different opinion than themselves is grounds for cancelling. I’m not advocating that your opinions be infringed. I’m asking that you try to remain neutral, and when you can’t try to make it as moderate as possible. Don’t be any more political than you have to be. You can say that you don’t like a view, but very rarely does it truly need to go further. Respect the forum, and if you don’t like something raise your objections respectfully both of the forum and of people who have opposing views. It’s not that they aren’t important views. It’s that you harm the very things you’re trying to make better (Qubes, privacy, etc.) by attacking the people who are trying to support the same things you are because there are differences in something unrelated. These topics are already suffering, whether it be from governments all over the world simultaneously becoming less and less free, to most people just not caring enough to do much, to charlatans almost everywhere trying to sell you a product and lying to do so under the guise of privacy and security. Fight other battles as much as you want, just do it in their arenas for the sake of preserving this one. Remember that the people here are your friends because they want the same things as you as long as they are in this forum. Even if they have differences on how they want it done or what they consider important within this realm. There are also plenty of victims of the charlatans I mentioned who need time to understand that they’ve been lied to.

If you’re someone here who’s taken political stances or attacked the mods/moderation (beyond respectful criticism), I truly hope that you will come to the table here. Please, most of you who are doing that are also giving valuable contributions. We want you here. We just want you to be nice and respectful about it, as we would all be happier. All it takes self-control and restraint. You have to overlook thing you don’t like in order to get the things you do. But everyone, you especially, are the better for it. Please give this serious consideration.

Original Post

I’m disappointed. This is always going to be a problem, but I’m disappointed at the uptick in scale, or at least the loudness of the few, that has happened recently. I’m talking to you, you know who you are on this forum. This is in regards to the general principle, but in response to the most recent example Mullvad VPN co-owner gives ~$500k USD to far right Swedish party.

This is my opinion and I’m speaking only for me, but you should listen. I’ve said it before and I’ll continue to say it: This forum is not the place for politics inasmuch as they do not directly pertain to technical matters, privacy, security, or another very closely related thing. It’s not the place for partisanship. It’s not the place for you to twist this into your narrative. It’s not the place for left, right, center, or anything that’s not technical. It’s great to say for instance that age verification is bad. Why? Because that’s not left, right, or center. It’s about the invasion of privacy and that it’s just a universally bad, technically incompetent idea.

It’s also not the place for personal attacks. I don’t care at all if the owner of Mullvad is an actual “I believe in concentration camps” Nazi. It’s not that it’s not a valid thing to be concerned about it’s that you’ve made it about beliefs and politics and not about the actual technical efforts or actual content of the programs/services they offer. You’ve made it personal, and that has no place here. Absolutely discuss it on some other relevant place! Malign him to your hearts content! Curse him out and say how you believe he should die! Just don’t do it here. (I’m not actually supporting these things, just pointing out how ridiculous it sounds.) This place is for discussing the actual facts. I, for one, have very strong beliefs on a great many of controversial subjects. I’m not really on any other forums near to the degree I am here. I am tempted often to give my opinion on many of these matters. But there is a right place to do that, and here isn’t it. It’s especially not the place to say “This one person involved in a project supports something I don’t like, so let’s cancel him permanently.” It’s not about if what he supports is good or bad. There are people I don’t like, and products I stay away from because I don’t agree with the political direction of the company. But these people have the exact same right to their opinions as you and I do.

“I don’t like the political direction of someone in leadership at Mullvad VPN. Can someone make another recommendation and guide for that VPN to accommodate me?” See how easy that was? You’ve expressed your opinion in a forum-appropriate way, and you’re not being a jerk about it nor implicitly demanding everyone else share your opinion. It’s THAT easy.

On the subject of mod censorship:
These people are giving of their time and energy for free to help this forum thrive. Their job is literally to censor, and you won’t always agree. I don’t always like their choices, but I’m not volunteering hours of my time to prove myself, become a mod, and then to do it consistently to do it better either, am I?

Again, the theme here is NOT that you can’t say what you want. It’s “keep it appropriate or do it somewhere else” and “don’t be a jerk.” So, if you don’t like a mod decision or direction, DM THEM. Just ask what they were intending and say what you think in a polite way. AND LISTEN TO WHAT THEY SAY. They have been very helpful and understanding, and if you think they’re doing something wrong and approach them nicely, then they’ll make reasonable accommodations for you. If they don’t, they probably have a good reason. If they give you a problem personally or as a group, try to handle it personally or as a group. Then escalate.

There’s also no problem with creating a thread about how you don’t like the overall moderation theme. But don’t do it by personally attacking the mods by calling them feds over evidence that could equally be explained by them holding a different opinion than you or by controlling how things are done so that the forum is kept neat and tidy.

Let’s take the example of Intel’s ME. Someone (I don’t remember who and it doesn’t matter. I’m not picking on them, just using their mistake as an example) a short while back complained publicly that mods were silencing discussion on Intel ME. They ignored the fact that there has been incessant discussion on the forum about it. They ignored the fact that recent discussion has said nothing new and had gotten off-topic for Qubes. They ignored that mods aren’t disallowing the topic, but that they want it contained to existing threads. The fact was, that mods weren’t silencing the discussion at all, but that they were managing the forum and preventing one topic from commandeering it. In other words, they were doing exactly what they should.

If you have a post that’s been moderated, DM the mod(s) and ask what you can do to raise it in an appropriate way. I personally guarantee that they will tell you the exact reason your post was moderated and what you can do to post it OR that your post was wholly inappropriate and this isn’t the place. They may even tell you a good forum to talk about it.

It’s the same thing with politics. I’m not advocating that your opinions be infringed. I’m asking that you respect the forum, and if you don’t like it raise your objections respectfully.

Is this truly so hard? I’ve come on so strong because you all are better than this. But I truly hope that you will come to the table here. Please, most of you who are causing the most problems on this matter are also giving valuable contributions. We want you here. We just want you to be nice and respectful about it, we would all be happier. Yes, it takes self-control and restraint. You have to look at others doing what you want to do and swallow your pride. But everyone, you especially, are the better for it. Please give this serious consideration.

First, this is wrong sub-forum for the topic you raised.
Second, we are already discussing it in a

Third, there it is said that ignoring is the tactics that actually do a change. By opening a separate topic you are flooding the forum, but even worse, you are promoting the problematic topic thus inviting people to actually check it.

We’ve seen messages like yours at least as much, if not more, as the off-topic topics count.

None of this contradicts the fact that I agree with what you wrote to the last letter. But, already said too many times… Ignore it. Find positives on other topics. Don’t let negatives ruin your day. it is exclusively your choice, not forced by anyone to be provoked.

I could imagine almost to be labeled as Karen to react this way in a real life (not personal, that’s why I put myself into position)

I moved every VPN post from this topic into the existing topic in the All around Qubes category:

@kuhbs needs @trust_level_2 to access it, so either they can originally earn it through forum activity, or their account can be manually upgraded to it.

Out of transparency, this was the message I received from @deeplow during February 2025 when I was promoted to @trust_level_4:

Since then, I have done various boring, public janitorial tasks on the Qubes OS Forum:

  1. Formatting HCL reports in the HCL Reports category (self-assigned duty)
  2. Correcting minor grammatical issues from users, even from the Qubes OS team
  3. Splitting and merging topics/posts, as demonstrated in this exact post
  4. Resetting topic bump dates, I utilize this feature most aggressively since every edit from the last post in a topic bumps it back up to Latest

This has been the only incident in the last 16 months where I have exercised discretion to close a political topic with an appropriate response, not only because it risks dividing a community even further, but it is also simply off-topic as a whole, so between closed and unlisted, I chose closed because it is also a useful behavioural sample of a malicious actor’s playbook:

  1. Ragebait title to elicit emotional responses
  2. Blog article in foreign language, not English
  3. Mentions Qubes OS activists as the target audience, even though Qubes-Whonix users exist
  4. Also mentions @solene or other significant community figure with a call-to-action to frame the post itself as contribution scaffolding

Outside of the Qubes OS Forums, I have various projects that involve pattern-matching behavioural signatures, social engineering jailbreak prompts, and deep supply chain audits, so I simply reuse this existing security framework everywhere now.

Technically I am not a moderator, I just have privileges similar to one, so for me, simply post in this topic and I will publicly address your concerns until either of these conditions are met:

  1. I voluntarily surrender @trust_level_4
  2. The Qubes OS Forum moderators revoke @trust_level_4

My public activities across the Internet and in real life have zero personal stakes, so I can still operate just fine without any of the privileges I currently have.

I think you have been a good trust level 4 member. But I always thought you were a moderator. But that’s easy to mix up.
I think it has been confusing seeing you as a moderator who’s actually helpful and not an obstacle, when other moderators, like Sven especially are not.

Are these projects just your own hobby projects or are they serious projects, maybe money involved or NGO or something?
If it’s professional roles I am curious what kind of job title those tasks fall under and which corporations/organisations hire you to do those things.
It also seems possibly illegal if you are using those methods everywhere like you said. Because if a forum’s moderators are using those kind of techniques to collect data on users, it has to be clearly written in the privacy policy.
But I think you know better than that, so that’s probably not what’s happening. But I would appreciate to learn more about these interesting projects.

Do you really need someone’s privacy policy to set up your threat model? Do you include risk assessment during developing your threat model? Hint: Mullvad VPN has a perfect privacy policy, yet here we are on the topic about Mulvad VPN’s big guy donating to the far right (guys and gals). Should that info be included in privacy policy?

It’s all about us, not about us trying to transfer responsibility to a third parties. So, when I share a part of my grub line, it was my clear choice to further identify myself fully aware of the consequences, not a guy’s guilt asking about it (“I will tell you, but promise me you will tell no one else”).

And the source of bad decisions is the worst possible word that exists: “If”. Just imagine programming with “When-Then” instead "If-Then". I am convinced we would have waaaay less bugs, because we wouldn’t fall so often into false sense of security when (pun intended) using “If”. Test: find “if” in any of my posts. I would be happy to edit it immediately. Try it: put “when” instead each “if” in your last post and look how that changes your perspective on the “issue” with @FranklyFlawless.

I never said anything about my threat model. You went off on something unrelated to what I said.
I just pointed out that it’s a crime and it’s also unethical.
Someone should contact the authorities to look into several posts from qubes team that suggest criminal activity is happening behind the curtains. Either way, the community should be brought aware of what might be happening. It’s hard to trust qubes devs who say it’s not illegal to collect personal data without consent. And that they also have a large amount of such personal data collected. Chances seem high that they are doing unethical crimes when they say such things.
It looks even more guilty when they get so defensive about it.

Why do you care about “unethical crimes” here (unlike “ethical” ones)?

I think the community should see exactly what posts I meant because it can be difficult to find otherwise.
The below quote escaped my full attention at first because i didn’t critically wonder where that data comes from.

In this link, unman argues against my post where I said it’s illegal to collect mouse movement data without consent. He says it’s not illegal: The grandest obstacle to making anonymous web browsing possible in QubesOS - #112 by unman

And now, in this topic, FranklyFlawless said:

It’s a bit confusing to understand because he says “outside of the Qubes OS forums”. But then he also ends by saying that he does this everywhere. Everywhere sounds like he does it on qubes os community without consent. But I assumed it’s a misunderstanding which should be clear in my reply to him for more info.

But some of the users who do fed propaganda, seem to be defending the idea that qubes os team are doing mouse movement fingerprinting against their users without consent. And they appear to not find it unethical or problematic.

It all adds up, these little puzzle pieces, to look a bit suspicious. One of these posts on their on, can be ignored but, as they all keep getting added up they paint a worrysome picture of what might be happening, illegally, behind the scenes.

But to be clear, I’m not saying they are doing it. But it might be worth investigating further.

I never said I cared more about or only about unethical crimes. Just that if they are doing this, then it’s an unethical crime.
But objectively speaking, it should be obvious why an unethical crime is worse than an ethical crime. Even the law sees a difference in that but they have other terms for that. I just came up with this simplified terminology on the spot. You can probably get a good comprehensive explanation if you ask an AI.

We really should be caring most of all about ethics because almost all the problems we have are caused by corporations who act unethically within the law. Just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s ethical.

I never asked you why do you care more.

This strikes me as an extreme distortion of a thread that I’ve been following with interest and a tone that suggests ill intent toward other community members. Trolling of this nature is not tolerated here. If you have a case to make, then please do so without distortion and innuendo.