Privacy Guides
Consider removing anything based on Lokinet #51
-
|
Probably should wait for their reply as to who this "admin" person is, but it truly is a sight to behold. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 0 comments 5 replies
-
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
tommytran is not on the privacyguides team, that doesnt mean he's not allowed to open discussions anymore |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
What is the implication for Lokinet's security here? My understanding is that we primarily recommend Session as a no-phone-number Signal alternative because of its E2EE attributes, and not because of anything related to Lokinet, so even if there is some issue with it, I'm not sure that our recommendation is compromised in any way. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
why do you think it should be removed? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
It is rather frustrating as the single developer working on lokinet when someone external comes into our support channels, dumps a massive stinking pile of FUD that needs to be cleaned up and expects a warm welcome afterwards. I welcome constructive feedback on what we are doing and would love more contributors, behavior like the kind that was directed in our support channels is not that. I would like to refrain from getting any more users flinging mud about. This kind of conduct is very very unproductive and highly detrimental to mass adoption of most privacy tech. There is already a massive stigma about the privacy ecosystem being super hostile to outsiders and escalation is detrimental for every project in this space, not just your's or our's. I will admit that while it WAS 6am local time, the mod call made was rather heavy handed which is why it was reversed shortly after. If anyone wants to have an actual discussion on the merits of why certain technical design choices were made in lokinet I am open to having that at any time, on our github discussions page for any such topic. Twitter is not a place for any kind of substantive discussion on any topic and it is highly reckless to seek such resolutions there. Condensing complex ideas into 240 character bites is irresponsible. edit: linkified "github discussions page" |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
It is rather frustrating as the single developer working on lokinet when someone external comes into our support channels, dumps a massive stinking pile of FUD that needs to be cleaned up and expects a warm welcome afterwards. I welcome constructive feedback on what we are doing and would love more contributors, behavior like the kind that was directed in our support channels is not that. I would like to refrain from getting any more users flinging mud about. This kind of conduct is very very unproductive and highly detrimental to mass adoption of most privacy tech. There is already a massive stigma about the privacy ecosystem being super hostile to outsiders and escalation is detrimental…