Countries share information though. And it is not below a fascist US to give China some nice trade deals for detailed information on queer US-Americans. Nor is it for China to accept such a deal.

I admit, I was partially wrong. The CoC violations occured outside freedesktop and he received an email from a freedesktop member stating that their CoC does extend outside their immediate project, to some extent.

This isn’t that unreasonable in my opinion, considering that his behavior “reflects on communities like [FreeDesktop] when [they] interact with and accept contributions from hyprland.”

Of course this should only apply to severe CoC violations considering that two different CoCs rarely overlap in full.

So the reason for the ban was that hyprland’s developer published their email exchange and wrote an extensive, surprisingly hostile blog post about it.

I genuinely recommend reading their exchange, I’ve rarely seen this amount of hostility and toxicity in an email exchange - followed up with “I hope we can resolve this constructively” and “I will be seeking legal action if you continue threatening to ban me”.

NAND = ¬(A ∧ B) = ¬A ∨ ¬B = Not A or Not B

NOR = ¬(A ∨ B) = ¬A ∧ ¬B = Not A and Not B

It’s an idiom about admitting you’re wrong.

In other words, you could write the sentence as:

“If there has been significant positive change since then, I admit that what I wrote was wrong.”

I’m not actively following it since I stopped using Hyprland around that time.

If there has been significant positive change since then I stand corrected.

No, this was an instance of transphobia in their official Discord community. See this for context.

Another instance is how Hyprland’s developer is banned from contributing to freedesktop.org for repeated COC violations.

Hyprland has a right-wing reactionary community surrounding it. For instance, on their Discord a trans person had their username’s pronouns changed to (who/cares) by a moderator after being upset that they were misgendered.

I meant to convey how so much of the existing green space was paved already that paving the entire green space wouldn’t be much different at this point.

I would guess the paved paths make up like 20% of the image? That’s far too much in my opinion, green space in cities is already severely limited.

You can also see how every time a desire path was paved, new desire paths sprung up - which were then also paved.

Your feedback is valued.

I don’t think there’s an issue with desire paths becoming unusable during certain times though. It slightly extends the time you spend walking around but I’d prefer this over having unnecessary pavement.

You might as well pave the entire green space in this example.

Mud is messy

It depends. Some people view lawns that aren’t devoid of all insect life messy or trimmed evenly messy. And if it is raining or has recently rained, hardly anyone would use a muddy path so the concrete sidewalk will remain reasonably clean as well.

wheelchair-accessible

That’s important, though I’m not advocating for keeping an entire campus unpaved. I am arguing that only necessary pathways should be paved while desire paths should ideally remain unpaved. People in wheelchairs should still get around (quickly), but desire paths don’t need to be wheelchair accessible in my opinion.

Is there an issue with muddy bisections? It might not look the most appealing but it’s better than pavement.

To prevent the paths from getting ever wider you could, for example, plant flowers next to them. That’s a pretty effective and unobtrusive way.

Not necessarily good though since it further seals the ground. There’s nothing wrong with leaving desire paths untouched.