Getting into any form of discussion regarding T is unwise.
Yet I wanted to point out something
Mastodon mission has always been to provide users freedom from and alternatives to the giant faceless autocratic exploitative social media.
Or at least that is what I gleam from a search of Mastodon prior to when T ran for president.
To now state for the record that T is not supposed to use the software seems like a politically biased flip.
I also think that it is prudent to wait until launch to critique their compliance.
Usually marketing / legal comes up with copy and its get cut and pasted in.
It -may- change, it probably wont.
We will have to wait and see.
I know I have replaced content for similar things right before someone hits the button and right aftwards.
I hope the organization does the right thing with attribution.
I have not visited yet, and I dont know much about Mastodons code.
If they have configured and setup an instance of Mastodon with their own graphics / content / resources.
Is just that required to be published to be in compliance?
I presume people much smarter than me know they have added features and improvements to the code I certainly hope they share it.
I am 100% sure that there is a giant hoard of high profile lawyers who wants this case now and plenty of millionaires and billionairs who want to fund it.
Mastodon will not have to finance the trials that might come.
Lastly the more T is seen as a martyr being kicked out everywhere the more devoted his cult followers become.
To be clear Mastodon is not claiming that T can't use their software. They very clearly state that he can absolutely use their Software so long as he abides by the license and provides attribution as well as any modifications to the source publicly so this is not in the category of a politically biased flip. It's common place license enforcement that just happens to be politically significant because the target is T.
Why should a software licence only apply after "launch"? From what I can tell, "Truth Social" is violating the AGPL if they don't hand over the source code within a thirty-day period after the request from Mastodon. If they do, fine, but if they don't, Mastodon can revoke permission to use their software.
Mastodon mission has always been to provide users freedom from and alternatives to the giant faceless autocratic exploitative social media.
Or at least that is what I gleam from a search of Mastodon prior to when T ran for president.
To now state for the record that T is not supposed to use the software seems like a politically biased flip.
I also think that it is prudent to wait until launch to critique their compliance.
Usually marketing / legal comes up with copy and its get cut and pasted in.
It -may- change, it probably wont. We will have to wait and see.
I know I have replaced content for similar things right before someone hits the button and right aftwards.
I hope the organization does the right thing with attribution.
I have not visited yet, and I dont know much about Mastodons code.
If they have configured and setup an instance of Mastodon with their own graphics / content / resources. Is just that required to be published to be in compliance?
I presume people much smarter than me know they have added features and improvements to the code I certainly hope they share it.
I am 100% sure that there is a giant hoard of high profile lawyers who wants this case now and plenty of millionaires and billionairs who want to fund it. Mastodon will not have to finance the trials that might come.
Lastly the more T is seen as a martyr being kicked out everywhere the more devoted his cult followers become.