03.17.21
The Corporate Linux Foundation is Now Using the ‘Code of Conduct’ Aggressively and Excessively to Censor People Using Bots, Not Human Assessment
Summary: Instead of protecting people, as the Linux Foundation likes to claim, it is engaging in automated social control, just like in social control networks or social control media (where mentioning the word “Memphis” gets you banned now)
THE people who run the so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation don’t use Linux. Some of them are Microsoft employees (still salaried entirely by Microsoft), which ought to tell us how much the foundation really does to represent “Linux” (as in the kernel).
“They work for monopolies, not communities…”For many people in the Free software community and even for some kernel developers the so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation has become a subject of scorn and ridicule. It’s like a force of occupation, not emancipation. They work for monopolies, not communities…
Before you beat us to it, yes… we’re well aware that nowadays even monopolies pretend to be “communities”…
Would that be a cynical ploy?
They also pretend to be “open” (openwashing) and “green” and “against racism”…
Hours ago the so-called ‘Linux’ Foundation (or Corporate Linux Foundation) reaffirmed its support for monopolies by advertising yet another ‘event’ that cannot be accessed without proprietary software (Zoom). They’re doing it again and again. They clearly don’t understand or don’t care what “Linux” stands for…
But to make matters worse, a source told us about a “Linux Foundation bot censoring/CoC,” in effect a rather obscure process wherein the Linux Foundation censors people’s private speech using not as much as human assessment, just bots.
“The gentleman I spoke with,” our source said, “is in embedded and has been a GNU/Linux user for well over 15 years. He was interested in the origins of the Code of Conduct… I shared links etc. regarding the origins.”
As it turns out, the Corporate Linux Foundation is outsourcing decision-making associated with the Code of Conduct to bots, just as social control media sites do to lower or avert accountability. It also limits how many people they need to hire. Sometimes they hire people on the cheap, people whose language skills will impede judgement.
In the next (and final) part we’ll explain one example of this. Stay tuned… █
Content is available under CC-BY-SA