remote/open-slopware
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware.git synced 2026-06-06 09:07:03 +02:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

make it clear that we don't want social media posts (#752)

Browse source 
Co-authored-by: JesseBot <jessebot@linux.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware/pulls/752
This commit is contained in:
vleermuis-admin 2026-05-20 21:29:14 +02:00 • committed by Admin
commit c703e400ba
2 changed files with 15 additions and 5 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

4
CONTRIBUTING.md
View file

@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ The criteria for being included in this repository are any of following tags. Yo
Alternatives should not contain any slop as defined by our tagging system above.
Please don't submit social media posts as evidence unless it is a post *by a maintainer of the tainted project* talking about using AI to develop the tainted project. Even then, we'd prefer links to a project's LLM commits in a git forge, AI/contributing policies, or blog posts.
### Style guide
When submitting new software to this list, please check out the [style guide](./STYLE.md) to ensure you are conforming to our community agreed upon standards.
@ -82,4 +84,4 @@ In either case, one thing you can do is react positively to a given upstream iss
# Social media
We would appreciate it if you did not mention this repo on social media or in chats in order to shame a project or community. Do not make posts like, "`<project>` should be added to the open-slopware list", especially if you are tagging a maintainer or using a project's hashtag.
We would appreciate it if you did not mention this repo on social media or in chats in order to shame a project or community. Do not make posts like, "`<project>` should be added to the open-slopware list", especially if you are tagging a maintainer or using a project's hashtag. Please also don't quote social media posts in the "Why not LLMs" section.

16
FAQ.md
View file

@ -20,16 +20,16 @@ There's no great place to put these in our current files, but these sorts of que
## If a repo had slop before, isn't it permanently tainted? Aren't all forks of slop therefore also slop?
> No. See also: [guide for removal](https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#removal).
> No. See also: [guide for removal](https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#removal).
>
> Eventually, the slop will likely either be removed, replaced, or deprecated.
>
> We're also against AI for more than just code quality reasons. There's plenty of ethical reasons to be against continuing to use AI:
>
>
> - [environmental](https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware#environmental-impact)
> - [ties to the war industrial complex](https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware#ties-to-the-war-industrial-complex)
> - [effect on hardware prices hurting newcomers to the industry](https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware#effect-on-hardware-prices) (especially those already disenfranchised)
>
>
> The commitment to stop using AI stops those above ethical issues. It's like going vegetarian. You're still a vegetarian if you previously consumed meat, but now you don't. You've still reduced suffering and helped the environment. A commitment to doing better is better than never stopping a harmful action.
## Is a project tainted if it has dependencies that are tainted?
@ -48,4 +48,12 @@ There's no great place to put these in our current files, but these sorts of que
## Why is removal harder than landing on the list in the first place?
> Because the project betrayed our trust. Now they have to try harder to rebuild that by committing to doing better in an accountable, public, concreate, and enforcable way. If the project is committed to doing better by rejecting AI in the future, putting out a No AI policy or updating their contributing docs, shouldn't be that difficult.
> Because the project betrayed our trust. Now they have to try harder to rebuild that by committing to doing better in an accountable, public, concreate, and enforcable way. If the project is committed to doing better by rejecting AI in the future, putting out a No AI policy or updating their contributing docs, shouldn't be that difficult.
## Why can't I include an social media post?
> We do not want to have a social media type atmosphere here and quoting social media posts, no matter what side people are on, gets messy. The mtaintiners here do not have the mental health to engage in social media drama that inevitably arises from AI bros, nor do we want to inflict that on anyone who is unaware of this list and hasn't consented to that attention. This does not mean you should reach out to your favorite anti-AI influencer for permission to include them in this list. We don't want you to do that.
### But what if it's a social media post against AI?
> We would then need to research those social media users and see if we endorse them or not and we don't want to do that either.