Post #3004460
2025-09-07 23:00 UTC
Replies (7)
-
@gimmechocolate@bark.lgbt 2025-09-08 12:50
Update 2: Unofficial response from queer ubuntu member, diversity statement, post is reverted, but... The first response is a queer Ubuntu member saying that it was a mistake and shouldn't've happened. As I've argued in my previous posts, I think that the moderator responses are acting on their underlying values as opposed to it being a simple mistake. If those values conflict with the values of Ubuntu, then that is a problem that is a bit more difficult to solve than with a talking to. If I were in the position of the moderators I'd be either reflecting on my values; or stepping down, and maybe looking to moderate a space that more closely aligns with my values such as Hyprland. As a moderator myself I've been on the verge of stepping down for much much less. Overall though I do think they are taking the right attitude. https://fosstodon.org/@AKernelPanic/115166376744790018 Another response has told me that apparently there is a diversity policy. I was gonna make a whole stink about how it's hard to find, and how it's arguably a suggestion as opposed to the actual CoC (which it's not included in). Then I actually read it and it includes "Political beliefs" as a protected class. This means that the positions of the moderators are actually totally in line with the diversity policy. Putting queer people and people who want queer people gone into the same category IS a component of far-right ideology, as I covered in post 2. Not having discrimination based on political beliefs necessitates having discrimination based on other protected classes. https://masto.pt/@DiogoConstantino/115168524107698808 https://web.archive.org/web/20250908125245/https://ubuntu.com/community/docs/ethos/diversity Lastly the post got reverted. This is largely symbolic, as I doubt lukas will actually want to participate in the community after all that. I woulda been a lot happier about writing this down if I didn't just read their diversity statement that implies the moderators' actions were, in fact, in line with the values of of Canonical and Ubuntu.
-
@Kitheyn@bark.lgbt 2025-09-07 23:14
@gimmechocolate@bark.lgbt The comment in question:
-
@Li@tech.lgbt 2025-09-07 23:22
@gimmechocolate@bark.lgbt > The issue was never with the poster's self identification. oh cool can't wait to hear whatever fucking excuse they give for that one lmfao, like bruh the only thing changed was "i am queer and i am" unless they had an issue with saying "i am" twice or some shit; then there is fuck all it can be; besides that everything else stayed .. .. seems pretty clear the issue is one of them being queer, like seriously .. just recognize you fucked up
-
@Kitheyn@bark.lgbt 2025-09-07 23:22
@gimmechocolate@bark.lgbt And just to keep the 'excuse' timeline going, we've now gone from 'too sexual' to 'hypothetical christian may find it unethical' to 'too political' to 'secret fourth thing'.
-
@baralheia@dragonchat.org 2025-09-08 02:25
@gimmechocolate@bark.lgbt It looks like they've backtracked on the community forums at least, and restored the original text of the post along with this note:
-
@aud@fire.asta.lgbt 2025-09-08 02:41
@gimmechocolate@bark.lgbt there’s a couple threads floating around here about Canonical’s hiring/interview practices (I’ve written one about my own experience). This all falls very much in line with who they actually seem to be, as a company. Tl;dr: they strongly gatekeep their interview process for engineers against anyone who isn’t a relatively neurotypical cishet male while claiming they hire “the best”. They’re a shit company, and it’s run by a shit man. Shuttleworth is awful.
-
@gryps@social.anoxinon.de 2025-09-08 12:24
@gimmechocolate@bark.lgbt How about leaving the subject now? Is it really worth to waste as much of your and your friends mental energy on this? You barked. Thank you for it! No we know about the problem. But if the team don't want to listen, you and/or your friend should strole on in search of a more friendly/inclusive pack/team.