Title of the (concerning) thread on their community forum, not voluntary clickbait. Came across the thread thanks to a toot by @[email protected] (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
I very much care about the view of business owners are; it’s how I decide to where my “vote” goes when I “vote with my wallet” as I’ve frequently told to do by Capitalism supporters.
Voting with your wallet has nothing to do with politics, but price, quality, and service.
Then why did people freak out over serving gay people?
Idk, but choosing to not serve people is a good reason to not buy from them, even if you’re not impacted, because they could choose to not serve you or your friends. That said, of the owner doesn’t support gay maffkagy but serves and hires gay people, that’s a different thing entirely.
That’s a lot of bending over the point of money has always been political.
In am abstract sense, sure. But boycotting businesses over something their owner or executive said doesn’t send a very clear message.
It’s not about sending a message. It’s about cutting off funds to hate.
Voting is wielding political power, whether it is with your wallet or anything else.
It doesn’t have to be, and that’s my point.
Using your wallet doesn’t have to be political.
Voting is, by definition, political. It is a common part of several different methods of resolving coordination problems (i.e. politics).
No, voting is only political if it’s part of a political process. Everyone in a group voting what kind of pizza to order isn’t political, and it can merely be informative (e.g. the person ordering the pizza could pick something else). Voting is only political when it involves government.
“Voting with your wallet” a metaphor. It just means changing your shopping habits so a company loses revenue, usually due to a recent change. Maybe it’s a policy you don’t like, or maybe it’s a drop in quality or something. It’s usually not a political act, though it can occasionally impact political policy (e.g. if the boycott is in response to a political change that involves the target company).
Yes, it literally is. That’s what politics is: how we control group behavior.
No, politics is specifically concerned with government. Any other use is generally a metaphor for government, like “office politics.” Voting on what food to get for dinner isn’t “politics,” neither is boycotting a store for treating their employees poorly.
“A methodology and activities associated with running […] an organization” – https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/politics
Any organizational decision is politics, including but not limited to a group of people organizing a pizza meal.