If open source is bloat, then absolutely I agree it is toxic.

Though some "open source software" isn't bloat, so... depends.

Naming? What do you mean by that?

Do you mean toxic? Bloat?

:s

There is the matter of choice, but there is also the dominant social construct in which we now live. I find myself wondering which is the most critical. Is it us people not interested or without solidarity, or does the construct (meaning the social-economical status quo) have succeeded in making it extremely difficult for us?

Usually I tend to blame the ones that have more power and control. In the case of YouTube, Facebook, etc, I believe that they are the ones that we need to criticise way more than the users of those platforms.

Having said that, I also believe that if we, the free software activists who try to understand and expose the full depth of the asymmetric control that these platforms have to manipulate humanity, we also use this platforms, even in order to show that they are bad for democracy, we somehow make them more legit. People will say, look, even free software people use YouTube so there isn’t an alternative.

And this is not only a thing in technology. This is also true for human rights, politics, climate activists etc.

Some people say, there is no time. We need to act now and use all the means we have, mass media, twitter etc. I can see their point and so I try not to judge them. They do the way they feel and I do they I feel. Maybe both paths can cross somehow someday...?

@nparafe: Your post is tasty *logging in for replying*

On root level, there is just one question: Greed or compassion. Everything else is just a spin-off of this struggle between these opposing forces. And we humans are just play balls between them.
Egoism puts you into the center, solidarity puts us into the center - not just you. People in ego-mode, that's just the consequence of greed putting so much pressure on them in multiple ways, that their basic stress level is high. And that changes stuff in our brain for the bad, infects us with greed.
Currently, greed - the root of all evil - has the upper hand in society; that's why most defaults are bad.
Switching a default from bad to good, that is a crucial step for team compassion, but no default stripes
off responsibility off every single one of us.
At the end of the day, we build up the world with every single detail of our lifestyle and have freedom of choice.
The people here have gathered, because in dealing with computers they've deliberately chosen, want more libre computing.

Exactly! The law of attention in full swing. Or as Friedrich Nietzsche put it in words: 'The deeper you look into the abyss, the deeper the abyss looks into you.'
Whatever we focus our attention on, will get stronger. That's why Trump got president - his biggest competition, Hilary Clinton, was his biggest cheerleader, leaving out no opportunity to talk about Trump extensively.
That's why we libre computing advocates are well-adviced to build up our own game, reconstructing our broken digital world by a fully new model, the 'libre variation'. Focus on the good, and the good gets stronger; focus on the bad, and the bad gets stronger.
That's one of the reasons why net politics activists are constantly loosing: They are always defending against the bad, reacting to the bad, but completely fail in building up the good they want to see on its own. Instead of being the change they want to see they make their very existence depend on the bad just as 'anti-capitalists' do. What do 'anti-capitalists' do, when there existence corner stone 'capitalism' breaks away? What are they then? What have they then?

FSF - it has done a lot good. But it also focuses too much on the bad meanwhile. Going well beyond simply focusing on the bad for explaining the situation.

It's tricky. I see your point. To a certain degree, indeed, the main thing is, that we do anything for the better, using all means at hand. That's a key ingredient for accessibility of our endeavor. But on the other had basically applies: The more conclusive, logical consistent we act, the more efficient we work towards our goal - here in this case of a libre digital world.
But the more we do it,  the more we make ourselves hard to access for average people - in our case by becoming very tech-savy, building up a digital divide.
Finally, the solution, the reconcillation probably is the path FSF hit recently:
'Freedom Ladder'
Democratizing the personal journey of becoming a libre computing activist in the long run over a lot of small stepping stones, gradually, recognizing that noone of us fell of the sky as a Richard Stallman, encouraging development. Not letting 'good' be the enemy of 'better'.

To swing more into the point: Using Youtube for getting people away from Youtube? Yes, that's constructive, but let's also make sure, mirror our content, on a libre platform and set soft incentives on Youtube to rather chose to use this libre platform for accessing our content. That set up is open, no echo chamber, but at the same time triggering a stream to the better - among others a better default.

Undertone: Yes, free/libre computing activism, animal rights, human rights, climate activism - all that and similar stuff shares the same basis: Compassion. Is one team: 'Team compassion'. And the more we understand that and play together by living compassion consecutively, logically consistent in this universal, broad sense, the stronger we get.
2 examples: Placing net politics flyers on an animal rights info booth, and placing animal rights flyers on a hacker space - that makes totally sense.
This cross-section event 'Bits and Bäume' - 'Bits and Trees', a meet up of net politics community and climate activism community, talking with each other, figuring out to work together, that totally makes sense.

Oh yes! You're so right about FSF & Pure OS!
If you ask me, they have taken Pure OS up in the first place just to have movement and development in their list of fully free operating systems, which hasn't changed for years and seemed pretty dormant up to that extension.
You know the saying - probably by Confuzius - 'Who doesn't correct a mistake, does another one.' ?
Based on that, FSF is well-adviced to remove Pure OS from their list of fully free operating systems.

Oh, about the part to disagree with the FSF: I would have many more, on the core-side I think they don't mean it harmful. The result is nevertheless questionable nowadays, but not meant in regards of something "pure", more just to recognize the context of a problem itself. So is military helpful? Depends, personal stated I would really love peace. But on the other side I recognize also that there are people and groups out there not being at minimum interested in freedom and peace. So even if I go with pacifism I have to recognize that not all is solved with words and discussions, as hard I see it I hope we can get a turning-point. For the better, for another vision living together. But this gets us back to the point of "greed", because one day - I hope - we all can see that "money" is nothing to eat as we are all guests on this nice blue planet, all beings for sure.

And I know how this sounds to make "peace" with "weapons": Therefore I would have found it better the FSF had never stated such like you have linked and kept the head outside of this, same with talking about and with "corporations".

Please let us focus and stay at the point that the FSF should have stayed the same out of making cheap articles like that. I think that's the bare minimum we can call it for sure as everything else tend to be a wide longer, deeper and more out of bounds discussion. Sure thing: Interesting - for me speaking - but I think also about the readers outside not attending, even if this area is "General" marked.

Otherwise we would need to reflect about wide more, even movies and digital other media (like games). So this why I have chosen "out of bounds". Not to disrespect your posting and you, but to let us focus at the generic point itself. Yes, there are many details within, but I think this would lead to a thread only some people could attend into and the rest left out reading.

But when the whole "free, libre software"-movement makes itself depending on just some individuals and their names - just to remember that no one is "perfect" in the whole definition - it is also more than just "vulnerable". Technical emancipation begins at everyone owns will for doing so, while there needs to be projects offering also the tools for doing so. If we sit beneath, wait for some people giving us the next release or don't support projects with the will doing something different we will have in a short time only some names left, only some projects there and those are getting themselves to some "monoliths" while just to pretending to be some system-distribution. In fact they also rely on more too big projects, which are - and that's the essential point - also very fast taken over. The always used argument to "just fork when no longer working" is no longer valid for big ones outside as they unite too much functionalities in combination with too much complexity.

The FSF and also many named individuals fail to recognize this or when brought into ignore the criticism in a whole.

Again to remember that I don't think we should debate on those levels and I don't want to debate for sure on those: The reasoning is therefore, that I'm not okay with the picture dealt with. For sure humans may and can do hateful things and disgusting deeds. But the original message is and was:

One person is not always perfect and a person should be also getting valid criticism. Instead we often find meritocratic structures likewise the more one person is doing and more binding the project, the more rights are there and the more this individual is drawn back from being criticized. In fact it goes the opposite direction. But this locks also this person in a kind of echo-chamber, where no further self-reflection is at a point possible and others just follow all words said and jump on every criticism for defending reactions. That's the point and please let us keep it just there.

What I have written in the first part of this posting brought now to the full closure: I don't want to deal with that kind of picture of us, because it takes just the negativity. How do we want to build another culture, when we only deal with such? Knowing about hatred, harassment and more is one thing, but another to go against with the clear point of values and principles for inclusion and diversity, solidarity and empathy. If we don't make that, we can already stop building alternative structures and ideas as we have not outspoken but clearly given up. I don't have given up and I don't think anyone here has that also! So let's keep it up with clear criticism, instead of thinking how bad people / groups / else would do stopping something. Our history is full with that, learning that is one point, but another if we only debate about it and be sure: Done that multiple times. One example I can name was once back the days in 2012 on Diaspora, the discussions were endless long, full with interesting points first. But the more discussions, the more people got tired, blended up and out, the more negative the environment got, the more shorten the activity was. The end? Well to be seen today as those alternatives are somewhat just the same even on the same side of the coin. Yes, groups can be formed also nowadays, but that keeps those echo-chambers up and running, while people forget more and more about free and libre software, free and libre culture in its roots. That's one part of the reasoning we are at this point and one part why we do what we do here. With clear compassion and empathy for what we are doing. Let us stand for an inclusive, friendly for all beings, democratic culture within the "free and libre software"-movement.