commit: 448fc21448f515fd8d68c9dc0a39161c9e9fa85c
parent 1c9b1fccf31401b73e149056857332cc0136f87c
Author: Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2021 10:40:38 +0100
No, seriously, don't use Discord for FOSS projects
Diffstat:
2 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/content/blog/Dont-use-Discord-for-FOSS.gmi b/content/blog/Dont-use-Discord-for-FOSS.gmi
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+Six years ago, I wrote a post speaking out against the use of Slack for the instant messaging needs of FOSS projects. In retrospect, this article is not very good, and in the years since, another proprietary chat fad has stepped up to bat: Discord. It’s time to revisit this discussion.
+
+In short, using Discord for your free software/open source (FOSS) software project is a very bad idea. Free software matters — that’s why you’re writing it, after all. Using Discord partitions your community on either side of a walled garden, with one side that’s willing to use the proprietary Discord client, and one side that isn’t. It sets up users who are passionate about free software — i.e. your most passionate contributors or potential contributors — as second-class citizens.
+
+By choosing Discord, you also lock out users with accessibility needs, for whom the proprietary Discord client is often a nightmare to use. Users who cannot afford new enough hardware to make the resource-intensive client pleasant to use are also left by the wayside. Choosing Discord is a choice that excludes poor and disabled users from your community. Users of novel or unusual operating systems or devices (i.e. innovators and early adopters) are also locked out of the client until Discord sees fit to port it to their platform. Discord also declines service to users in countries under US sanctions, such as Iran. Privacy-concious users will think twice before using Discord to participate in your project, or will be denied outright if they rely on Tor or VPNs. All of these groups are excluded from your community.
+
+These problems are driven by a conflict of interest between you and Discord. Ownership over your chat logs, the right to set up useful bots, or to moderate your project’s space according to your discretion; all of these are rights reserved by Discord and denied to you. The FOSS community, including users with accessibility needs or low-end computing devices, are unable to work together to innovate on the proprietary client, or to build improved clients which better suit their needs, because Discord insists on total control over the experience. Discord seeks to domesticate its users, where FOSS treats users as peers and collaborators. These ideologies are fundamentally in conflict with one another.
+
+=> gemini://seirdy.one/2021/01/27/whatsapp-and-the-domestication-of-users.gmi See also: WhatsApp and the domestication of users
+
+You are making an investment when you choose to use one service over another. When you choose Discord, you are legitimizing their platform and divesting from FOSS platforms. Even if you think they have a bigger reach and a bigger audience, choosing them is a short-term, individualist play which signals a lack of faith in and support for the long-term goals of the FOSS ecosystem as a whole. The FOSS ecosystem needs your investment. FOSS platforms generally don’t have access to venture capital or large marketing budgets, and are less willing to use dark patterns and predatory tactics to secure their market segment. They need your support to succeed, and you need theirs. Why should someone choose to use your FOSS project when you refused to choose theirs? Solidarity and mutual support is the key to success.
+
+There are great FOSS alternatives to Discord or Slack. SourceHut has been investing in IRC by building more accessible services like chat.sr.ht. Other great options include Matrix and Zulip. Please consider these services before you reach for their proprietary competitors.
+
+Perceptive readers might have noticed that most of these arguments can be generalized. This article is much the same if we replace “Discord” with “GitHub”, for instance, or “Twitter” or “YouTube”. If your project depends on proprietary infrastructure, I want you to have a serious discussion with your collaborators about why. What do your choices means for the long-term success of your project and the ecosystem in which it resides? Are you making smart investments, or just using tools which are popular or that you’re already used to?
+
+If you use GitHub, consider SourceHut or Codeberg. If you use Twitter, consider Mastodon instead. If you use YouTube, try PeerTube. If you use Facebook… don’t.
+
+Disclaimer: I am the founder of SourceHut.
+
+Your choices matter. Choose wisely.
diff --git a/content/blog/Dont-use-Discord-for-FOSS.md b/content/blog/Dont-use-Discord-for-FOSS.md
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+---
+title: Please don't use Discord for FOSS projects
+date: 2021-12-28
+outputs: [html, gemtext]
+---
+
+Six years ago, I wrote a post speaking out against the use of Slack for the
+instant messaging needs of FOSS projects. In retrospect, this article is not
+very good, and in the years since, another proprietary chat fad has stepped up
+to bat: Discord. It's time to revisit this discussion.
+
+[previously]: https://drewdevault.com/2015/11/01/Please-stop-using-slack.html
+
+In short, using Discord for your free software/open source (FOSS) software
+project is a very bad idea. Free software matters — that's why you're
+writing it, after all. Using Discord partitions your community on either side of
+a walled garden, with one side that's willing to use the proprietary Discord
+client, and one side that isn't. It sets up users who are passionate about free
+software — i.e. your most passionate contributors or potential
+contributors — as second-class citizens.
+
+By choosing Discord, you also lock out users with accessibility needs, for whom
+the proprietary Discord client is often a nightmare to use. Users who cannot
+afford new enough hardware to make the resource-intensive client pleasant to use
+are also left by the wayside. Choosing Discord is a choice that excludes poor
+and disabled users from your community. Users of novel or unusual operating
+systems or devices (i.e. innovators and early adopters) are also locked out of
+the client until Discord sees fit to port it to their platform. Discord also
+declines service to users in countries under US sanctions, such as Iran.
+Privacy-concious users will think twice before using Discord to participate in
+your project, or will be denied outright if they rely on Tor or VPNs. All of
+these groups are excluded from your community.
+
+These problems are driven by a conflict of interest between you and Discord.
+Ownership over your chat logs, the right to set up useful bots, or to moderate
+your project's space according to your discretion; all of these are rights
+reserved by Discord and denied to you. The FOSS community, including users with
+accessibility needs or low-end computing devices, are unable to work together to
+innovate on the proprietary client, or to build improved clients which better
+suit their needs, because Discord insists on total control over the experience.
+Discord seeks to [domesticate its users][0], where FOSS treats users as peers
+and collaborators. These ideologies are fundamentally in conflict with one
+another.
+
+[0]: https://seirdy.one/2021/01/27/whatsapp-and-the-domestication-of-users.html
+
+You are making an investment when you choose to use one service over another.
+When you choose Discord, you are legitimizing their platform and divesting from
+FOSS platforms. Even if you think they have a bigger reach and a bigger
+audience,[^1] choosing them is a short-term, individualist play which signals a
+lack of faith in and support for the long-term goals of the FOSS ecosystem as a
+whole. The FOSS ecosystem needs your investment. FOSS platforms generally don't
+have access to venture capital or large marketing budgets, and are less willing
+to use dark patterns and predatory tactics to secure their market segment. They
+need your support to succeed, and you need theirs. Why should someone choose to
+use your FOSS project when you refused to choose theirs? Solidarity and mutual
+support is the key to success.
+
+[^1]: Discord appears to inflate its participation numbers compared to other services. It shows all users who have ever joined the server, rather than all users who are actively using the server. Be careful not to optimize for non-participants when choosing your tools.
+
+There are great FOSS alternatives to Discord or Slack. SourceHut has been
+investing in IRC by building more accessible services like [chat.sr.ht]. Other
+great options include [Matrix] and [Zulip]. Please consider these services
+before you reach for their proprietary competitors.
+
+[chat.sr.ht]: https://sourcehut.org/blog/2021-11-29-announcing-the-chat.sr.ht-public-beta/
+[Matrix]: https://matrix.org
+[Zulip]: https://zulip.com
+
+Perceptive readers might have noticed that most of these arguments can be
+generalized. This article is much the same if we replace "Discord" with
+"GitHub", for instance, or "Twitter" or "YouTube". If your project depends on
+proprietary infrastructure, I want you to have a serious discussion with your
+collaborators about why. What do your choices means for the long-term success of
+your project and the ecosystem in which it resides? Are you making smart
+investments, or just using tools which are popular or that you're already used
+to?
+
+If you use GitHub, consider [SourceHut](https://sourcehut.org)[^2] or
+[Codeberg]. If you use Twitter, consider [Mastodon] instead. If you use YouTube,
+try [PeerTube]. If you use Facebook... don't.
+
+Your choices matter. Choose wisely.
+
+[codeberg]: https://codeberg.org
+[GitLab]: https://gitlab.com
+[Mastodon]: https://joinmastodon.org
+[PeerTube]: https://joinpeertube.org
+
+[^2]: Disclaimer: I am the founder of SourceHut.
