Title of the (concerning) thread on their community forum, not voluntary clickbait. Came across the thread thanks to a toot by @Khrys@mamot.fr (French speaking)
The gist of the issue raised by OP is that framework sponsors and promotes projects lead by known toxic and racists people (DHH among them).
I agree with the point made by the OP :
The “big tent” argument works fine if everyone plays by some basic civil rules of understanding. Stuff like code of conducts, moderation, anti-racism, surely those things we agree on? A big tent won’t work if you let in people that want to exterminate the others.
I’m disappointed in framework’s answer so far
Did the author bother contacting them first before treating them like utter garbage and trying to rile up a public lynch mob? Just because something is well known to you doesn’t make it well known to everyone. If there are no alternatives with the feature set you are looking for, then sometimes you even have to overlook questionable authors, sort of like Lemmy. If it’s open source and has a license that allows forks, it doesn’t matter that much.
You use open source because of functionality. It didn’t used to be too long ago when people bothered to prove other people wrong through example instead of persecution. If you never convince people they are wrong, you just favor them creating and being in as much of an echo chamber as yourself. Even when they can’t be convinced, there are other people listening to the conversation.
Even just from looking at it from a practical standpoint, it would sink just about any company if they have to go full FBI investigation for every single member. If you agree with OP so much, then why do you not agree with OP?
Some people want to watch the world burn bridges.
from what i’ve seen online, the build quality of framework laptops is garbage as well. i’d rather get a (linux) laptop with solid build quality and use it a bit longer instead of having to replace the monitor hinges every year or so.
Yes, the community.frame.work is the preferred method for asking questions to Framework (see: https://frame.work/support), and the first post makes a few statements about non-Framework persons/projects and Framework has sponsored, and asks one question to Framework.
So, if you’d read the damn post, you’d know this is exactly how Framework asks to be engaged.
plus it’s their CEO, or their community manager in their name, directly addressing the questioner and going “you don’t understand, under our big tent approach only 5% of people we give money to are controversial, let’s not address your concerns and move on.”
Removed by mod
Even in what you quoted, Framework has provided no more preferred communication method for this discussion.
No, my name is Stephen.
https://frame.work/en/en/contact-us
Because mod or alt mod removed it:
You mean the post that literally says otherwise and that the quote from OP I had in my original comment agreed with?
I can’t even imagine the fundamentally flawed view of the world to think the best way to solve an issue like this is to first go through a public forum.
I’ll excuse the rest of the comment, but check out the modlogs if you want to do so. Guess rule 3 is enforced directionally.
From that page:
Pretty sure I’ve made my opinion clear. Well, at least before you were offended by a slight comment and tried to and successfully removed the comment with the context. So much for public forums then, huh. The page has a direct way of contacting them through email for more sensitive issues like this, you are the one choosing to skip the option.
I can’t remove anything. I not a mod or admin of anything throughout the Fediverse. I think I can delete my own posts, but that might (and probably should) leave a deletion log similar to the edit log. (Actually the delete log should just be an edit log that ends with “DELETED”.)
EDIT: The mod log says the comment violated rule 3. I think the part of your comment using a common name as an indirect insult might have not “be[en] excellent to” me, but that’s just a guess.