A number of brand new accounts have popped up shilling their paid for applications.

Is this within the rules? Is the community happy with this? Could mods clarify this in the rules?

Either allowing advertising, or banning it entirely.

my point is - there is a difference between an open source homegrown project that might be useful, vs closed source paid for projects from brand new accounts

some replies are misunderstanding, somehow.

I am against

brand new accounts who:

  1. first post is a brand new project
  2. project is closed source
  3. project will cost money
  4. is asking for free testing
  5. the post is literally an advertisement

top 90 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 199 points 4 months ago (38 children)

I think new accounts that show up to shil their app should be banned. They're not actively participating in the community, it's just spam. There's been a huge uptick recently.

  • source
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    This has gotten a ton of votes, and I'm in agreement that new accounts that have only posted about their paid app should be considered spam, and I would say a timed ban (maybe a week?) would be a good start.

    Now what about open source vs paid? Devs who made something may just think "oh I should share it on selfhosted!" On their freshly made fediverse account. Does open source get the same treatment? I'd lean toward no, but some of these projects have a paid component as well - paid hosting, or a license upgrade, or whatever.

    I think its fine that they want to make some money, and I'm personally more positive toward a hosted option than a paywall, but its a finer point to navigate than just "paid vs open".

    That said, I do see a problem with comments on some posts as well - a reply with "spam" and no report is not helpful. The comment itself isnt helpful. A downvote and report is.

    So I think a clear and concise set of rules would be helpful, and maybe with a separate list for fully open source and no paid component, open with a paid component, and a fully closed (paid or not, because we all know where the profit comes from in this scenario).

    I'd personally lean toward something like an account xx days old to be able to self-promote, and tags for each type of post.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    Personally I'm fine with paid apps here, lots of people use tailscale for example. I think the larger issue is the drive-by spamming without contributing outside of their own promotion thread.

    I like the comment elsewhere in this thread referencing a subreddit that requires X comments over Y days in the community first.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    N of one, but:

    • Paid closed source = Advertisement, ban.
    • FOSS without free self hosting = Advertisement, ban.
    • FOSS with self-hosting but some self-hosted features are paid = Still an advertisement, but MAYBE acceptable if we are being lenient. I don't like it, personally.
    • FOSS with free self-hosting and paid hosted services = Good for them, play on.

    Edit: @Shadow@lemmy.ca had a comment about Tailscale, it's a prime example of the last bullet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    There is a sticky up with the currently proposed rule.

    Paid closed source or f/loss with a paywall requires active (non-advertising) participation.

    f/loss that can be hosted and used fully without a paywall (even if they offer their own cloud option, or a donation subscription, whatever) is exempt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -21 points 4 months ago (32 children)

    I think new accounts that show up to shil their app should be banned.

    What if the new account user, who is working on a product that integrates with what the vast majority of selfhosters run, just found Lemmy? Lemmy selfhosted doesn't exactly share the same popularity as say Reddit. It doesn't just roll off the tongue. I had to vigorously try to find Lemmy before I got here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] 53 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    They should hang out a while first and not have only posts promoting their software, and not only have comments in those threads.

    The lemmy attitude is very anti commercialization, and they don't know any better. That doesn't mean we should allow it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -14 points 4 months ago

    They should hang out a while first and not have only posts promoting their software, and not only have comments in those threads.

    I tend to agree.

    The lemmy attitude is very anti commercialization

    The lemmy attitude is like chaff in the wind.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 41 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    "Lurk for a while before posting," has been a standard rule of netiquette for at least the 30 years that I've been using the 'net.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -13 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I would tend to agree with that. Maybe OP didn't think of that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    They did think about that, apparently you did not. Did you not see that they specifically said "brand new" accounts? Or are you talking about the most recent OP that posted an ad to beta test closed source software?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 4 months ago

    That sounds like you're describing someone who is only making a lemmy account because they see potential customers they want to advertise to.

    That's the exact reason I don't want someone to make a lemmy account.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 10 points 4 months ago (22 children)

    are they charging? is it open source?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 4 months ago (21 children)

    They aren't charging you. The OP/DEV in question is willing to give their product away. A product that integrates with your opensource *arr stack. All he wanted to know is, 'Would you be interested in beta testing it?"

    I mean, there was recently a new user here who intro'd himself as a Windows selfhoster. He was pretty much welcomed with open arms, with a few snarky remarks, but welcomed. How much more closed source could you get than Microsoft Windows? What's is the actual difference here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago (20 children)

    Lmao, the OP you're talking about literally said that "It's a paid closed source app". Why are you not mentioning that little tidbid?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 4 months ago (19 children)

    “It’s a paid closed source app”. Why are you not mentioning that little tidbid?

    I assumed everyone has a decent reading skills?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] [S] 17 points 4 months ago* (8 children)

    that is incredibly misleading.

    its not someone asking advice about a closed source app. its someone shilling their own paid for product.

    why are you ok with advertising for paid for products being shoved down your throat?

    they arent “willing to give it away”. theyre willing to give it to testers for free labour to test their paid for app.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    why are you ok with advertising for paid for products being shoved down your throat?

    No one, not one living soul that has graced the halls of Lemmy selfhosted since I've been here has shoved anything down anyone's throat. Are you not master of your own domain? Do you not possess self control? Additionally, I chart my own course. I don't let hive mind tell me what I can and can't selfhost or use in relation to my server.

    they arent “willing to give it away”. theyre willing to give it to testers for free labour to test their paid for app.

    So, to recap, they're going to give their app, which is closed source but integrates with what most selfhosters host, to beta testers, who are interested, and in return, the beta testers get to keep the app for free. I see no free labor.

    It was said when rule 3 was being discussed, that there are so few selfhosters out here, why gatekeep?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 9 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    I dont want to scroll lemmy to find advertisements.

    why are you fighting so hard for it? do you want adverts here? do you want every post to be yet another closed source paid for project? Thats sad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Well, for one, I can actually scroll right by things I'm uninterested in. My mouse wheel goes by three row clicks. It doesn't take all that much effort, even for this old geezer, to just whiz right on by. Even if it's something I'm uninterested in, like the *arr stack in general, I can still be positive about it. It's pretty fascinating to me how it all clicks together. But I have definite, hard coded opinions against piracy in general, no matter what your rationale is. I know some use the *arr stack for their own physical collections, but let's be real....the vast amount of selfhosters that deploy the *arr stack are pirating.

    why are you fighting so hard for it?

    Because I honestly feel that the OP with the integrated, closed source app he asked if anyone wanted to beta test, acted in good faith.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Every comment you make makes me more and more convinced that you've created a throwaway account to advertise your own paid products here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Now that is quite hilarious. What paid products am I advertising? I'm not a dev, and frankly I would never be a dev. For one, I'm not that well educated in the area of programming. Two, I wouldn't be confident enough to release it to the public. Three, I wouldn't put up with all the bellyaching that goes on, demanding that a dev do this or that with something he wrote. Hard pass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Did I say you did so on this account?

    Your long reply and bullshit about "bellyaching" isn't helping me think otherwise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 4 months ago

    Did I say you did so on this account?

    OK you got me. I joined a year ago, made a fistful of accounts, just for this very day. Even though, if you rifle through all of my posts and comments, you'll pretty much see, I have no programming skills and I have nothing to sell. But again, you are welcome to your own opinion.

    Your long reply

    I'm— sorry—I—used—too—many—sentences.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    Yes, but all of your comments seem to miss the fact that this post is talking about paid software. Which is what the OP you're talking about and defending did. You also said "they aren't charging you", which might be true for now, but they will make money off of beta tester's free labor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    but they will make money off of beta tester’s free labor.

    That's exactly how beta testing works. I've mentioned, I do a lot of beta testing for BetaBound. I'm currently beta testing a rumba floor sweeper knock off. WHen I'm done, the company says 'thank you' by letting me keep the rather pricey product. Are they going to make money? Of course they will. That's why they started business....to make money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    I'm aware, and don't think that ads to provide free labor for a paid product belong here. That's been my entire argument the entire time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    I’m aware, and don’t think that ads to provide free labor for a paid product belong here.

    I honestly think, that the OP/Dev in question acted in good faith. I do not view his thread as an advertisement to buy his product. IMHO, he solicited beta testers for his product that integrates with the *arr stack, which the vast amount of selfhosters deploy early on in their selfhosting journey. Where else would be a better place than a selfhosting community?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago* (5 children)

    The question isn't "did OP act in good faith".

    I do consider it an ad to recruit people to do beta testing for a paid product. I don't want to see ads in my feed. If I wanted that, I'd go to reddit. Maybe they should post there instead, where ads are overwhelming and users don't give a shit about being advertised to constantly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I do consider it an ad to recruit people to do beta testing for a paid product.

    Fair. You do, I don't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    I'm very aware that you don't consider it an ad, but it's an ad in my eyes. It's literally a call to action to recruit people to improve their paid application in order to extract money from users in the future.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I’m very aware that you don’t consider it an ad, but it’s an ad in my eyes

    I've very aware that you do see it as an ad. So, here we are. I'm about to fire up a bowl, do you partake? It's some gnarly gas for sure. I like to share what I've grown with my own two hands. No strings attached. You don't have to put 5 on it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago*

    What if the new account user, who is working on a product that integrates with what the vast majority of selfhosters run, just found Lemmy?

    This happens on Reddit, and basically my problem is that these users often don't have enough experience to be able to actually give solutions. Reddit is full of people who think they have a good solution, dealing with comments of people explaining that what they are struggling with is actually a solved problem (or a skill issue). No one cares about your vibecoded slop that implements 1% of the features of an existing open source solution (they used to not be vibecoded but we still didn't care). It being paid and proprietary is just even more annoying.

    My idea of requirement to engage with the community is also about being able to ensure that the users are technically competent. If they are experienced, it will show up in the discussions we can see and review. For their benefit, if they lurk, then they can take a look at what is being used, and what problems actually exist, instead of making assumptions.

    If they really believe their product is so good, they can spend a few weeks helping people with Linux questions and sharing their (non product related) insightful thoughts on Lemmy so I don't dismiss them instantly when they finally advertise it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 89 points 4 months ago

    At it's heart, this is what @selfhosted is meant for:

    A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

    I would say that members talking about paid/closed products they use (ex. "I connect to this via Tailscale" or "I use company ABC for hosted VPS") to accomplish something is fine, but marketing or job boarding (ex. "Looking for QA on my commercial product") is not.

  • source
  • [–] 46 points 4 months ago

    I don't want this community, or any community on Lemmy for that matter, to become a lucrative platform for advertisers. If someone wants to promote their own product that they made, they should have some credibility as a real person beforehand. Not a brand-new account trying to sell a subscription to an app that's essentially still in open beta.

  • source
  • [–] 35 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Advertised? I'd vote no. Discussed? I'm all for it.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Eh, that may just promote a lot of "What are your opinions about x" posts where the first comment is the ad. Suppose it's an open call to list alternatives though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Should be a mod decision, but posters should be community participants/contributors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 29 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    On reddit, there is a community called r/progressionfantasy, which is about a specific type of fantasy fiction. They have a rule that self promotional posts (for paid books) must be preceeded by 10 comments, and actual engagement with the community.

    This is a reasonable compromise, in my opinion. Known community member who has been answering questions and contributiting to discussions?

    I would be okay if they dropped a paid product of good quality and with a reasonable business model (please no vibecoded slop).

    But drive by ProductNameAccount users who have never posted on lemmy before a bunch of self promotional posts? Yeah ban that shit.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    With the advent of AI bots trying to flood into Lemmy communities, I don't really see this as a viable option on the long run.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    It is possible to detect and moderate them, as long as your mods haven't been disappeared and replaced by people who's job is to accept bribes. And also when we can actually see people's history, since reddit now has an option to hide your history from others because of course.

    My usual method is to focus on content, rather than writing style. The AI bots can write a lot, or be brief, or whatever, but they don't actually contribute to the discussion. They just kinda paraphrase and restate what has been said, or when trying to sell a product they disagree and go "Are you sure this isn't an problem?" to everybody in the thread telling them that it's actually a skill issue.

    Sometimes they'll be a little better, but it's often surface level stuff that can be found at the top of a google search of keywords.

    This also makes it possible to tell the difference between ESL speakers who are using AI to clean up their writing style, and true bots. Since the ESL speakers will actually have something to say, but bots won't.

    And then: https://xkcd.com/810/

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 47 points 4 months ago

    This is the selfhosted community. Not the Free, Open Source community.

    I think you can infer the rules from the name here. The stuff you post must be related to software you can host on your own hardware. It need not be free, nor open source.

    Now your point about spam from brand new accounts that are literally just ads on the other hand is valid.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    While I'm fine with people wanting to self-host stuff with closed software (this includes Windows and Plex, btw), I personally am not interested in having ads of any kind in the community.

    To me self hosting is about controlling your data. While I wouldn't use proprietary software myself for this, I just want to make it clear that I'm fine with people asking for help it advice about it. Just not ads, of any kind.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Where do you draw the line? If a user who is generally a very active poster here wrote a useful program and hosted the source on Codeberg under a FOSS license, should they be allowed to make a post sharing it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    For me personally an ad is when I'm being sold something. I can't be sold something that is free and open. So someone showcasing their paid (but self hosted) service is an ad. Someone telling me about their (open) project is not.

    And when someone wants to use either and asks for help, is also (obviously) not an ad. Unless we see a flood of accounts posting trivial questions about a paid service to draw attention to it, but I kinda doubt it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    It would be helpful for such posts to include [PROPRIETARY] in the title, just as you included [META] since the majority of projects here are not proprietary.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I think its funny that anyone who has closed source software thinks the best place to advertise it is in the federation. I love the fediverse but if it was the fact that it was gnu that I checked it out. I would totally not be here if it was closed source.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    That's kind of the defining feature of spam. Not thinking if it's appropriate or good, just sending everywhere because some of it will generate clicks.

    "Just delete it" or "scroll past" is not a useful response. Spam is infinite unless it's blocked and/or punishable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago

    If their first interaction with a community is to try to sell their shit, i don't think they're gonna be welcome anywhere

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago

    No advertisement is ever appropriate, period. Advertisements should be banned. I don't mind a 'look what I made' post, but when the post designed to convince me to give you money, I see an immediate conflict of interest that suggests advertisement rather than information. It's hard to draw that line without knowing intention, so I don't think those posts should be disallowed, but if your post asks me to click a link to a product so I can give you my money, I'm downvoting.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago

    IMO, if you have some sort of posting/commenting history, and you're talking about a paid service that you happen to like, then no problem. If you're brand new and just posting to promote something, nah.

  • source
  • [–] 56 points 4 months ago* (14 children)

    I selfhost because I want to be in control of my data and own it. Closed software is the antithesis of that. They're just bots trying to advertise their software.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [+] -54 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    I want to be in control of my data and own it. Closed software is the antithesis of that

    So, please do share how your homelab has indexed the entire global internet, so you can use your 100% selfhosted, 100% open source search engine? I'm very interested. I've always wanted to run a search engine that is not tied to someone else's.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 4 months ago* (8 children)

    That's a petty troll response to a legitimate statement of what someone wants (which aligns with this group's stated focus), where they aren't claiming what they have done

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -43 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    It's not trolling at all. You stated you got into self hosting because you wanted opensource and you want to retain all of your data. I'm asking you to share your homelab set up. A lot of people would be genuinely interested. The point being, all the gnashing of teeth is a duplicitous argument. If you truly do as you stated, then I'm wondering how you search a global internet from your homelab that indexes it all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 16 points 4 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    There's no respect in that statement and thats not appropriate here. Lets calm it down and keep it a discussion, not aggression and attacks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -16 points 4 months ago (4 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Sigh... As always, life must be balanced. You can't go from one extreme to the other. It's a spectrum. I self-host what I deem important in order to keep it under my control and not on a capitalist platform.

    It's an adventure, each month, you learn more and realize that you can host more services yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I self-host what I deem important in order to keep it under my control and not on a capitalist platform.

    And I applaud you for that. However, the fact remains, that not everyone selfhosts for the same reasons. I got into selfhosting because I wanted to be as private, as secure, and as anonymous as I could be. However, I do thoroughly enjoy learning how to do things on my server. At my age, it's good to keep what's left of my brain active. I genuinely like to tinker. I do also make concessions.

    I looked at the rules, and I can't find anything about closed source. I did find 'without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.' The reason this thread exists is because some people think closed source that integrates with selfhosted, opensource, is 100% out, and I find no evidence of such. It also states 'Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated.' Civility: Hey is this open source? Was it vibe coded? Ok no thanks bro.' It sure isn't the dog pile on the rabbit we see most of the time here when something AI, paid for, or closed source that integrates with opensource threads show up.

    I agree that 100% asking selfhosters to outright buy something should be out. We've seen a few of these. But, again, the reason this thread was started was because a dev asked a bunch of selfhosters to beta test an app that integrates with what most here run, and in return for your efforts, he will let you keep the app if you so desire. So, you actually do retain control. You can pass. You can beta test. You can uninstall. Your choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    Self-hosting is a community effort in which the whole community helps each other to self-host their data, including programming the services people use for this purpose. The problem with closed-source software is that we don't know what's happening behind the scenes, or if it's indeed sending telemetry.

    Even worse, if that service is ever no longer supported or updated, I'll be left with data on my server that can't be used to its full potential, and a service that won't receive security updates.

    Open-source software, on the other hand, is a community effort. If, for example, software is no longer updated or supported, it can easily be forked, and my data can be transferred to the new service.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    do you know about YaCy?

    I do know YaCy. YaCy can use peers in the YaCy network for search results. I've never got consistently good results with YaCy tho. It's been a while sing I experimented with YaCy. Perhaps it has gotten better and I should revisit. I do run Searxng, but that is an aggregator and I'm still using an external search engine, just cutting out all the telemetry and metrics. My point was, selfhosters do not live in a bubble. We, like everyone else, depend on services that a closed source, and out of our control. Sure, we try to be as private, secure and anonymous as possible, however at times you got to do a little dirt. Making money off an app or service seems to be an sticky wicket with some. Yet FOSS is full of apps that require a subscription to unlock more or different features.

    • Buying an opensource app to unlock features. Dev team gets paid.
    • Buying an app for your phone: Dev team gets paid.

    I honestly don't see much of a difference, other than one is definitely opensource, while the latter may not be, or is a combination of both. That seems to make the defining difference to some. Not all selfhosters align with the same creed.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 24 points 4 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 34 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    No. They should not be allowed, especially the closed source, non-FOSS ones. It'd be one thing to have a FOSS application that has a premium option (such as Frigate), but if it's closed source and you have to pay, they shouldn't be in the self hosting community.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -20 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Even if you change the ROM in your Android phone, guess what? The ROM still relies on closed-source vendor blobs from the manufacturer that come with the stock firmware and most often are required to make your ROM do what it do. I would say that the vast majority of people screaming about closed source and how they own their own data, yadda yadda, yadda, when it gets right down to the brass tacks, somewhere, they rely on something that is not FOSS. It's a rather duplicitous diatribe.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Huh?

    So, if we have the choice of something 90% open and 10% closed, versus 100% closed, you're saying the first option is invalid to even desire, because it isn't 100% open.

    Wow. Just, wow.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -17 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    So, let me be exactly clear here: WE ALL MAKE CONCESSIONS.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    This logic is not great. I'd rather have something mostly open source (where I can check what blobs it's actually using) rather than something completely closed where I have no idea what's under the hood. It's not about concessions, it's about being able to tell what the hell software is actually doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I’d rather have something mostly open source (where I can check what blobs it’s actually using) rather than something completely closed where I have no idea what’s under the hood

    Mee2! However, not everyone here is of a hive mind. Not everyone here got into selfhosting for the same reasons. Like I've mentioned, it's a big umbrella.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago*

    That's not the question that was asked.

    The question is if brand new accounts should be able to shill their PAID closed source products without otherwise contributing to the community. They should not be able to do so.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›