Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout
Note Detail
Reply to @dthompson@toot.cat
PuercoPop@PuercoPop@mastodon.social (2026-07-29 04:32:58)
@dthompson Not sure what positive outcome you expect out of the submission. I understand the frustration. And the need to blow off some steam. The Fediverse, rather than the project's issue tracker, seems a more appropriate venue to do so.
Reacting to a participant arguing in bad faith (Gabber) with passive aggression only contributes to the communication breaking down. It helps their goal of winning through sabotage.
---Reply---
dave@dthompson@toot.cat (2026-07-29 04:37:20)
@PuercoPop my reasoning is that if a GCD expressed in the negative (prohibition of genAI) could not achieve consensus then it would be good to explore if a GCD expressed in the positive (permission to use genAI) could achieve consensus. if consensus cannot be achieved in either case then what does that mean?
Reply
---Replies---
Khleedril@khleedril@cyberplace.social (2026-07-29 05:14:40)
@dthompson @PuercoPop It would mean that the community is definitely split on the issue, to the point where a decision cannot be made and the project will become apathetic to AI; meaning in effect that AI will be allowed and therefore wins by default.
I kind of agree with the sentiment that this new GCD will only help their goal of winning through sabotage. I would very much have preferred to keep the arguments weighed against allowing AI in.