Your tone is a bit aggressive and disrespectful towards me, especially calling my approach simple-minded. I think people should be allowed to criticize without receiving aggressive replies which could deter people from speaking up.
I only answered the OP with facts and reason. this topic is about a reduction in activity.
So I gave a relevant example of my experience, 3 days wait duration for my post to be reviewed.
And that’s not something most people are going to tolerate unless they think it’s important enough.
So if other users are seeing a decline in activity, it seems reasonablem that it’s caused by increased moderation and control over content.
I think the user points to a thread similar to https://www.reddit.com/r/Whonix/comments/1rellkq/video_summary_tails_whonix_qubes_os_why_anonymity/ . But that thread and the video essentially focus on anonymity vanishing when one send traffic outside the computer, and it seems Qubes is more focused on security rather than anonymity. So if the threat model is anonymity based, Qubes maybe not be the best idea (and of course neither the worse).
Your tone is a bit aggressive and disrespectful towards me
OK
, especially calling my approach simple-minded.
Well, it is. You are blanket-implying more posts mean a better forum.
Which is a simple-minded, or un-sophisticated supposition.
I think people should be allowed to criticize without receiving
aggressive replies which could deter people from speaking up.
OK.
I only answered the OP with facts and reason.
Like the “fact”: “more moderation less activity”, implying less activity
is bad, or sleight-of-hand supposition that forum has become “so quiet”
(which it hasn’t).
this topic is about a reduction in activity. So I gave a relevant
example of my experience, 3 days wait duration for my post to be
reviewed.
And how’s this a supportive datapoint for the “fact” that forum has
become so quiet?
Just posting to show some more activity and get my first post on this account over with lol. I guess I can be considered an advanced user, started using QubesOS at 3.something, posting on new account because I forgot my original one and what email I used to sign up with. Maybe I’ll post some guides in the future on some interesting qube setups I have, if I remember.
Look at the users the mods rush to protect and the technology substance (or absence of it) from those users’ posts. Then look at the users the mods rush to police and the technology substance of those users posts.
That will tell you everything you need to know about what values the moderators hold high and what values they disregard.
What ends up happening is the technology-focused people leave and go to other venues. They take with them the experiences they had here.
Three times now I see a topic on this forum on my favorite Matrix channel to find the thread has been 404d or nerfed in some way because someone who barely understands the tech acted openly hostile to technology people and then cried victim when they got the curt response they were asking for.
This isn’t the same place it was two years ago. It’s crybully central now.
I know she’s off busy doing other things these days but I will be reaching out to Joanna directly about it.
I transitioned from a power Qubes user and a die hard nerd who would dig deep into each bump in the road, even contributing to the project sometimes - to a dumb LLM-asking user which would re-create a template from scratch before dedicating a minute figuring out what the problem was
I do not know what you mean.
I am not aware that mods “protect” any one, and I think that they
police sorts of discussion rather than specific users.
The values the mods hold high are set out in guidance and CoC -
sometimes they are heavy handed, sometimes they let things run. The
worst of times, like the best, are always passing away.
Good luck with that. Joanna is doing other things, but in any case
she had very little tolerance for the sort of discussions that I think you
would like to see here, and a pretty forthright way of dealing with
them.
I never presume to speak for the Qubes team.
When I comment in the Forum I speak for myself.
Given such accusation, you should provide more evidence. E.g.: which posts here in forum are you talking about (not “favorite Matrix channel”, whatever that is)?
I don’t want to insinuate something into your statements. But your account has been created just yesterday and you’re referring to period of two years - which at least that seems a bit weird.
Btw: My impression is, accusations of forum moderators in privacy or security-oriented forums apparently become more popular nowadays, not sure what’s going on with this. IMO , moderators are doing a good job here (but I am rather lurking most of the times).
FYI I read through your post twice and I’m unsure whether it’s intended to mean one thing or its opposite. Like I can interpret it both ways, depending on how in my mind I pin down the generalities. That makes it seem like FUD. I would hate for people to quietly wonder if I’m posting FUD, when I’m trying to be sincere, so just letting you know.
I would like to see more rich technology centered discussions and much less coddle culture bending over to serve the low-skilled. The pattern of blatant censorship on the topic of the Intel ME is a cause for serious concern.
Other than that I have no qualms.
In the context of the casual shutdowns of the threads about anonymity and privacy, something is clearly up. Seeking anonymity and privacy is why many reach for Qubes in the first place. It is why I have recommended Qubes to so many people myself.
If there is a larger imperative on the part of the Qubes forum team to avoid the heat that comes with these topics being discussed they need to be forthcoming and open about this. Anything short of that and they are their own FUD fountain.
Referring to the founder of the Qubes project as “mommy” is creepy and gross. You should keep this way of referring to her to yourself and off of this forum.
Founders of projects do actually care about their legacy. This forum is under the qubes-os.org domain and the quality of this forum does represent Qubes. As a developer myself I understand this. But I don’t expect non-developers to sympathize with us.
I would be happy to but a specific moderator (one who already has a reputation for attempting to police personalities, notwithstanding anything to do with the CoC) already deleted the one that raised my concern.
Given the current atmosphere that has festered, become noticeably worse in the last six months, and has become intolerable within the last month I will not be jeopardizing all the work I have already put in because one particular moderator who clearly isn’t working out is on a power trip.
Or more of both, because at the level of complexity we’ve attained in tech, literally everyone is low skilled at some, or even most, relevant subjects. This is the community forum afterall, by definition not a space meant exclusively for expert only discussion.
Or possibly Intel ME is a subject that has been raked over so many times in this community that it’s only the noobs who still want to talk about it. I enjoyed reading the recent posts, which reminded me of why I chose Qubes way back when. However, when the topic is also couched in immature use of language it becomes boring to those of us who have heard it all so many times before, especially when there are plenty of other subjects on which one can direct one’s attention and actually act upon the discussion.
I don’t know how much time we should spend coddling immature contributors, but I certainly wouldn’t equate suspending an account with coddling, nor would I equate it with censorship. The contributor in question should consider themselves chided and learn to be a more responsible member of the community. They clearly had done their homework on an important subject and had meaningful things to say, albeit necessarily sounding like broken record at this point.
I suspect you follow the forum much more than I do these days. Are “casual shutdowns of the threads about anonymity and privacy” common and more than merely redirecting people to whonix or other more appropriate areas for those conversations?
Lastly I have to give a big I AGREE to referring “Rootkowski”
