This coming from the country that still has slavery codified into their constitution. It just needs to be "as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted". Ie, their prison-industrial complex.

It's also about sending more money to the private companies running the concentration camps.

Two weeks.

Even completely disregarding the cryptocurrency angle, "content that harms the reputation of Codeberg" is wide open to all sorts of future arbitrary interpretation. It basically means "if a lot of people dislike your project we nuke it." Who knows when a lot of people are going to end up disliking your project? Who decides which people's opinion matter to Codeberg's reputation? And it's something that can change at any time.

Maybe some open-source Fediverse server's code is being hosted on Codeberg, and then one day some big news story breaks about how it was being used as the server for some big child porn distribution ring or something like that. The server's name is showing up in news articles about this. Does it now "harm Codeberg's reputation" for it to continue being hosted there? Boom, gone. Through no action or intent by the server's authors, through nothing they could control or anticipate.

What "new take?" I'm saying the same thing.

Ah well. You'll declare me a troll regardless of what I say, the goal determines the interpretation. This is pointless.

Pretty sure they're not users of Codeberg, and likely weren't the ones who voted for this TOS change.

Well, maybe Microsoft did, given it makes Github look more appealing by comparison.

Yeah, only "cryptobros" could be upset about an open source hosting site deciding to officially ban "anything they think makes them look bad", and using an entire field of software development as an example apparently based on the popular misconception that it's a scam. This certainly isn't a sign that any other projects could abruptly find themselves on the wrong side of someone's opinion of whether they're "bad" someday.

You pruned off the last part of the sentence in what you quoted: "which makes it seem like cryptocurrency is inherently scammy." Adds a bit of important context.

The interpretation that cryptocurrency projects are "harmful" is based on a popular position that misunderstands the nature of cryptocurrency and its full range of uses.

Your obsession with stalking me keeps leading you to pouncing on comments with an "aha! Got him!" That leads you to misinterpret them in the worst possible light. Which is quite ironic given the situation this thread is actually about.

That's not correct, and you should know better than to claim this.

This is my first exposure to Codeberg's terms of service, why would you think I know more than what I'm seeing here and in the linked pages? I haven't used them before (and almost certainly won't now).

The text you quoted from my earlier comment has nothing to do with any of this, either. I'm not sure why you think it means anything in this context.

AI is wildly popular.

Wow. I'd ask whether you've ever been in any threads on this community about LLMs, but of course I've come to recognize your particular username fairly well at this point.

An issue has been created asking for clarification.

Yeah, IMO this is not a good look for Codeberg. They banned a very broad category of project based on popular negative sentiment without apparently understanding what that category actually was like.

Sounds like they're willing to ban anything "unpopular." Not a good sign for serious development.

It's still rather poorly worded, though. The ban is: "Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg, such as cryptocurrency related projects" which makes it seem like cryptocurrency is inherently scammy.

Edit: Looks like clarification is being asked for.