@SuperDicq @hfaust @jeffcliff

Yes, their transparency is appreciated. I don't see any of my responses, but they may have been too long or rant-y.

I'd certainly want them to stick to GNU principles, and play well with the FSF, but I have an unrelated issue, which is their CoC. It deceitfully forces you to accept ideologies that are anti-scientific and sexist.

I remember when they did the survey. I responded in great detail, but I doubt there's many ex-contributors with a similar position, so they're not gonna care. Most people just quietly accept the CoC, not realizing what it's about. Similar to people who blindly accept proprietary licenses. In this case, it's a "social contract" instead, but it's just as deceitful and limiting to personal liberties.

To be honest, I don't really care any more, except that I get triggered enough to go on a rant of course, as you see. #Guix could win me back as a contributor if they ditched the CoC, but they're not gonna do that in a thousand years, so whatever. If I really wanted to use it and absolutely needed some patches applied, I'd just run a fork. If it's extra package recipes one needs, one can just store them in files. I avoid their community and refuse to contribute, although I might use the software if I have a use for it. Just like I avoid paying for proprietary software, but may use it anyway if it's useful to me.

I've been thinking of becoming a paid FSF member, but contributing to projects with freedom-restricting (anti-)social contracts is out of the question. Now that I think about it, I worry that my donations to the FSF may go to projects like Guix, so maybe I *don't* want them associated with the FSF any more, I'm not sure.