Codeberg Bans Cryptocurrency Projects

Owner

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

Need to be careful with wording like this. If you are going to provide examples you need to make it clear it is not an exhaustive list:

"Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg, such as - but not limited to - cryptocurrency related projects."

Need to be careful with wording like this. If you are going to provide examples you need to make it clear it is not an exhaustive list: "Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg, such as - but not limited to - cryptocurrency related projects."

Author

Owner

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

The text is now as-is because it was send out for votes. Small clarifications can be made afterwards by Presidium or Board. The whole spirit of the vote makes it clear this is a "not limited to" case.

The text is now as-is because it was send out for votes. Small clarifications can be made afterwards by Presidium or Board. The whole spirit of the vote makes it clear this is a "not limited to" case.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

Is there a definition of "cryptocurrency-related" somewhere?

Is there a definition of "cryptocurrency-related" somewhere?

Author

Owner

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

This has passed.

This has passed. 

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

Fk hell I just moved to a forge that banned bitcoin! Is this a joke??? https://blog.codeberg.org/we-stay-strong-against-hate-and-hatred.html

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

Please explain how do cryptocurrency projects harm codeberg's reputation

https://forum.codeberg.org/d/82-taking-a-stance-against-cryptocurrency

"The page you requested could not be found."

Codeberg/Community#794

Codeberg/Community#2184

These domains are strongly associated with fraudulent activities and high-risk investments

Not all of them are about it. First of all, in context of so called code forges, this is a tech. What kind of headache do you have, that you judge the whole group by isolated cases, and block ANY such projects, even those that have real technical value?

Please explain how do cryptocurrency projects harm codeberg's reputation > https://forum.codeberg.org/d/82-taking-a-stance-against-cryptocurrency "The page you requested could not be found." > Codeberg/Community#794 > Codeberg/Community#2184 > These domains are strongly associated with fraudulent activities and high-risk investments Not all of them are about it. First of all, in context of so called code forges, this is a tech. What kind of headache do you have, that you judge the whole group by isolated cases, and block ANY such projects, even those that have real technical value?

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

When some projects were transferred over, you started behaving strangely.

When some projects were transferred over, you started behaving strangely.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

While I respect this seems to have been a community decision (I also despise the amount of fraud coming from the crypto space), this does set quite a concerning precedent, and makes me a little nervous to continue recommending Codeberg.

Banning an entire category of software based on bad actors within that category is extreme, and prevents any healthy crypto projects from emerging here.

While I respect this seems to have been a community decision (I also despise the amount of fraud coming from the crypto space), this does set quite a concerning precedent, and makes me a little nervous to continue recommending Codeberg. Banning an entire category of software based on bad actors within that category is extreme, and prevents any healthy crypto projects from emerging here.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

I'm working on a project aimed at bringing privacy, security, and autonomy to at risk people groups. The language in this motion means I can no longer host it here. Is this what the Codeberg community voted for? The short-sightedness and incompetency is mind blowing. What do you call it when a group of people come together to weaponize their hate against a whole category of developers? Anyone?

I'm working on a project aimed at bringing privacy, security, and autonomy to at risk people groups. The language in this motion means I can no longer host it here. Is this what the Codeberg community voted for? The short-sightedness and incompetency is mind blowing. What do you call it when a group of people come together to weaponize their hate against a whole category of developers? Anyone?

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

I don't even understand the logic behind this? Because some cryptocurrencies are shady and bad, every single crypto project should not be allowed onto Codeberg? What if someone is studying blockchains and want to implement their own crypto? This is extremely insane to me.

I don't even understand the logic behind this? Because some cryptocurrencies are shady and bad, every single crypto project should not be allowed onto Codeberg? What if someone is studying blockchains and want to implement their own crypto? This is extremely insane to me.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

I'm sure you have some morally high reasons to stand against cryptocurrency, but the "illicit trade" and "evasion of sanctions" cited by sourcehut (since you seem to base your decision on it) are also what allows regular people, including LGBTQ+ people, living in sanctioned countries (which also, what a surprise, turn out to be unsafe for LGBTQ+ folk a lot of the time), to buy goods and send/receive money from abroad without being prosecuted by their governments (hi foreign agent laws! hi "extremism" and "terrorism" laws!).

I'm sorry, anti-war transgender person stuck in Russia, but from our moral stance, you shouldn't be able to purchase HRT from a lab using your XMR wallet. nor should your friend be able to pay for their foreign VPN VDS that they use to bypass the internet restrictions in USDT. the projects you used for this were hosted on Codeberg and not some other platform? well, too bad, they'll have to go someplace else that minds your existence or is welcoming to cryptocurrency as a whole, and you will wait. you and the tools you use will move to a greedy corporate hosting that is likely to impose its own restrictions on you in the future, or, even better, move to a less reliable self-hosted option, one per each tool to make it less maintainable and less accessible.

by taking this stance, at least from my perspective, you're just projecting your morally high delusion of dirty illicit 3rd world crypto scammers that are damaging the moral purity of Codeberg by... hosting code for their projects here?! which, mind you, almost all the time will just contain tools, _tools_ to do good or bad. do you want to ban BitTorrent-related projects from Codeberg next because they are "mostly used to get illegal access to unlicensed digital goods and services (piracy)" and also take up world bandwidth and compute? how about banning YouTube downloaders after those? hey, let's make it clear that Codeberg will not stand a single repo on its platform that involves encrypted messaging: you know only criminals use Matrix, right?

I'm sure you have some morally high reasons to stand against cryptocurrency, but the "illicit trade" and "evasion of sanctions" cited by sourcehut (since you seem to base your decision on it) are also what allows regular people, including LGBTQ+ people, living in sanctioned countries (which also, what a surprise, turn out to be unsafe for LGBTQ+ folk a lot of the time), to buy goods and send/receive money from abroad without being prosecuted by their governments (hi foreign agent laws! hi "extremism" and "terrorism" laws!). I'm sorry, anti-war transgender person stuck in Russia, but from our moral stance, you shouldn't be able to purchase HRT from a lab using your XMR wallet. nor should your friend be able to pay for their foreign VPN VDS that they use to bypass the internet restrictions in USDT. the projects you used for this were hosted on Codeberg and not some other platform? well, too bad, they'll have to go someplace else that minds your existence or is welcoming to cryptocurrency as a whole, and you will wait. you and the tools you use will move to a greedy corporate hosting that is likely to impose its own restrictions on you in the future, or, even better, move to a less reliable self-hosted option, one per each tool to make it less maintainable and less accessible. by taking this stance, at least from my perspective, you're just projecting your morally high delusion of dirty illicit 3rd world crypto scammers that are damaging the moral purity of Codeberg by... hosting code for their projects here?! which, mind you, almost all the time will just contain tools, *tools* to do good or bad. do you want to ban BitTorrent-related projects from Codeberg next because they are "mostly used to get illegal access to unlicensed digital goods and services (piracy)" and also take up world bandwidth and compute? how about banning YouTube downloaders after those? hey, let's make it clear that Codeberg will not stand a single repo on its platform that involves encrypted messaging: you know only criminals use Matrix, right?

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

The vagueness of the term "such as cryptocurrency related projects." has materially damaged Codebergs reputation in my eyes, and given the comments above, I am not alone. Therefore under its own construction that "Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg" should have been self defeating and not allowed under its own policy.

Examples of POTENTIAL "crytpocurrency related projects":

• ZK Proof Libraries.
• Blake and SHA HASH Libraries.
• PQ Crypto, ED25519 or ECDSA (secp256k1)
• ANYTHING to do with LibP2P or similar libraries.
• ANYTHING to do with BFT Consensus or other consensus algorithms.

So The only safe policy is to assume that Codeberg is basically anti-cryptography. Because most all cryptography at some level of relationship becomes a "cryptocurrency related project".

And in who's view is the reputational damage judged? An opaque select committee? Corporate sponsors? The rule is simply political cover for Codeberg to say "We don't like you even though your code is legal, see our TermsOfUse which says, politically acceptable projects are OK, and we define what is politically acceptable, and whatever 'cryptocurrency related projects' mean are not politically acceptable, and so might other undefined stuff we haven't decided on yet."

Needless to say, I wont be adding any more projects to Codeberg and I will move away from it as a platform. To be clear none of them are "Cryptocurrency related" by my interpretation, but hey, I did make a CBOR toolkit, and Cardano, a cryptocurrency project, uses a lot of CBOR, so maybe that is "Cryptocurrency related"... Who's to know?

The vagueness of the term "such as cryptocurrency related projects." has materially damaged Codebergs reputation in my eyes, and given the comments above, I am not alone. Therefore under its own construction that "Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg" should have been self defeating and not allowed under its own policy. Examples of POTENTIAL "crytpocurrency related projects": * ZK Proof Libraries. * Blake and SHA HASH Libraries. * PQ Crypto, ED25519 or ECDSA (secp256k1) * ANYTHING to do with LibP2P or similar libraries. * ANYTHING to do with BFT Consensus or other consensus algorithms. So The only safe policy is to assume that Codeberg is basically anti-cryptography. Because most all cryptography at some level of relationship becomes a "cryptocurrency related project". And in who's view is the reputational damage judged? An opaque select committee? Corporate sponsors? The rule is simply political cover for Codeberg to say "We don't like you even though your code is legal, see our TermsOfUse which says, politically acceptable projects are OK, and we define what is politically acceptable, and whatever 'cryptocurrency related projects' mean are not politically acceptable, and so might other undefined stuff we haven't decided on yet." Needless to say, I wont be adding any more projects to Codeberg and I will move away from it as a platform. To be clear none of them are "Cryptocurrency related" by my interpretation, but hey, I did make a CBOR toolkit, and Cardano, a cryptocurrency project, uses a lot of CBOR, so maybe that is "Cryptocurrency related"... Who's to know?

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

@stevenj wrote in #1254 (comment):

And in who's view is the reputational damage judged?

community, lol. AFAIK, anyone could participate in that poll. so some random people that think "crypto is bad blah blah blah" can _really_ ruin Codeberg's reputation by voting for banning crypto-related projects

@stevenj wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254#issuecomment-19918582: > And in who's view is the reputational damage judged? community, lol. AFAIK, anyone could participate in that poll. so some random people that think "crypto is bad blah blah blah" can _really_ ruin Codeberg's reputation by voting for banning crypto-related projects

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

@stevenj wrote in #1254 (comment):

I did make a CBOR toolkit, and Cardano, a cryptocurrency project, uses a lot of CBOR, so maybe that is "Cryptocurrency related"... Who's to know?

to really push this joke further, let's go ban Zig as it is used by Solana validator software (the source of most rugpull memecoins)!

@stevenj wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254#issuecomment-19918582: > I did make a CBOR toolkit, and Cardano, a cryptocurrency project, uses a lot of CBOR, so maybe that is "Cryptocurrency related"... Who's to know? to really push this joke further, let's go ban Zig as it is used by Solana validator software (the source of most rugpull memecoins)!

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

This is a fantastic improvement! Well done, Codeberg. I'm excited to participate in a platform that is willing to take an ethical stance, rather than succumb to a technolibertarian dystopia like we've been suffering through in other spaces for far too long.

This is a fantastic improvement! Well done, Codeberg. I'm excited to participate in a platform that is willing to take an ethical stance, rather than succumb to a technolibertarian dystopia like we've been suffering through in other spaces for far too long.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

This got posted to Hacker News, might be worth locking this thread to avoid off-topic discussion.

This got posted to Hacker News, might be worth locking this thread to avoid off-topic discussion.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

@tomodachi94 wrote in #1254 (comment):

This got posted to Hacker News, might be worth locking this thread to avoid off-topic discussion.

Ah yes, the elites have spoken, and debate must not be allowed to continue by the plebians. Free speech and open debate are where bad ideas go to die. Clearly there's a thought bubble being protected here.

@tomodachi94 wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254#issuecomment-19919563: > This got posted to Hacker News, might be worth locking this thread to avoid off-topic discussion. Ah yes, the elites have spoken, and debate must not be allowed to continue by the plebians. Free speech and open debate are where bad ideas go to die. Clearly there's a thought bubble being protected here.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

To be clear: I don't necessarily think this proposal was a good idea, I just don't think a flamewar is the best course of action here.

(To be super duper clear, for @jmgilman's benefit: I am not a member of Codeberg e.V. and did not take part in this vote. I am not affiliated with Codeberg.)

To be clear: I don't necessarily think this proposal was a good idea, I just don't think a flamewar is the best course of action here. (To be super duper clear, for @jmgilman's benefit: I am not a member of Codeberg e.V. and did not take part in this vote. I am not affiliated with Codeberg.)

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

There's a big difference between projects that are trying to harvest peoples money, and ones trying to secure peoples money. If there is no associated token or method of speculation, it can only be the latter. Also, Zig is basically the only programming language with secp256k1 in the standard library. This is the non-standard ecdsa curve Satoshi chose for Bitcoin, and is used almost exclusively for cryptocurrencies. For example, SSH cannot sign a Bitcoin transaction, because it implements the standard NIST-recommended P-256 curve

There's a big difference between projects that are trying to harvest peoples money, and ones trying to secure peoples money. If there is no associated token or method of speculation, it can only be the latter. Also, Zig is basically the only programming language with secp256k1 in the standard library. This is the non-standard ecdsa curve Satoshi chose for Bitcoin, and is used almost exclusively for cryptocurrencies. For example, SSH cannot sign a Bitcoin transaction, because it implements the standard NIST-recommended P-256 curve

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

My DirectDemocracy project is a decentralized, emergent e-voting app that includes its own cryptocurrency (called _drachma_). However, I consider it ethical for the following reasons:

1. It does not rely on PoW. Instead, it uses a new concept which I introduced: proof-of-humanity, which doesn't consume CPU/GPU resources like PoW. The consensus relies on a lottery which is very lightweight CPU-wise.
2. It doesn't allow speculation or capitalization as the drachma loses value over time, by design. Citizens, e.g., members of the Web of Trust, receive one _misthos_ daily, a universal basic income, expressed in drachma, whose value is re-evaluated daily to compensate the inflation of the drachma.
3. The drachma/misthos cryptocurrency is needed to guarantee a truly democratic system where people spending time for civic activities are rewarded (the misthos is inspired from the Misthophoria of the ancient Athene democracy which was preventing the return of oligarchy / plutocracy).
4. The overall goals of the project are very ethical: we believe that a truly democratic governance of the world will help addressing the most challenging threats: global warming, mass extinction, wars, nuclear threat, poverty, famines, etc.

The previous version of the project is described at directdemocracy.vote. Although the objectives remain the same, the new version, under development and currently hosted at codeberg, relies on a cryptocurrency: the drachma/misthos, which is a fundamental component of the system.

I would be extremely sad to have to leave codeberg, as I initially chose it for its ethical/political posture. I want this project to be fully independent from the billionaires who are controlling the people with AI/social networks, as DirectDemocracy offers a radically different vision for the future, based on the human rather than on the money. So github isn't an option for me...

My DirectDemocracy project is a decentralized, emergent e-voting app that includes its own cryptocurrency (called _drachma_). However, I consider it ethical for the following reasons: 1. It does not rely on PoW. Instead, it uses a new concept which I introduced: proof-of-humanity, which doesn't consume CPU/GPU resources like PoW. The consensus relies on a lottery which is very lightweight CPU-wise. 2. It doesn't allow speculation or capitalization as the drachma loses value over time, by design. Citizens, e.g., members of the Web of Trust, receive one *misthos* daily, a universal basic income, expressed in drachma, whose value is re-evaluated daily to compensate the inflation of the drachma. 3. The drachma/misthos cryptocurrency is needed to guarantee a truly democratic system where people spending time for civic activities are rewarded (the misthos is inspired from the Misthophoria of the ancient Athene democracy which was preventing the return of oligarchy / plutocracy). 4. The overall goals of the project are very ethical: we believe that a truly democratic governance of the world will help addressing the most challenging threats: global warming, mass extinction, wars, nuclear threat, poverty, famines, etc. The previous version of the project is described at directdemocracy.vote. Although the objectives remain the same, the new version, under development and currently hosted at codeberg, relies on a cryptocurrency: the drachma/misthos, which is a fundamental component of the system. I would be extremely sad to have to leave codeberg, as I initially chose it for its ethical/political posture. I want this project to be fully independent from the billionaires who are controlling the people with AI/social networks, as DirectDemocracy offers a radically different vision for the future, based on the human rather than on the money. So github isn't an option for me...

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

@nekogirl wrote in #1254 (comment):

@stevenj wrote in #1254 (comment):

> And in who's view is the reputational damage judged?

community, lol. AFAIK, anyone could participate in that poll. so some random people that think "crypto is bad blah blah blah" can _really_ ruin Codeberg's reputation by voting for banning crypto-related projects

Does the community vote for every projects removal?

@nekogirl wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254#issuecomment-19918777: > @stevenj wrote in #1254 (comment): >>> And in who's view is the reputational damage judged? >> community, lol. AFAIK, anyone could participate in that poll. so some random people that think "crypto is bad blah blah blah" can _really_ ruin Codeberg's reputation by voting for banning crypto-related projects Does the community vote for every projects removal?

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

I feel that this thread has gradually drifted off-topic and is on the verge of sparking an inflammatory debate.

I am not entirely familiar with the democratic process here, but are the internal voters of Codeberg e.V. required to justify their stances? Or are the voting results indisputable, irrevocable, and implemented immediately? Judging from the comments above, this could severely undermine the confidence of many valuable projects and their developers.

While I believe that banning scam projects _of any kind_ is entirely reasonable, blanket banning an entire category simply because a few scams occurred within it might cause panic in the community: what's next? Will all LLM projects or metaverse-related ones (such as VR projects) be banned as well?

I believe it is crucial to draw a clear boundary here and explicitly inform the community about the exact nature of this proposal and which specific list of projects will be affected.

(To avoid being mistaken for a troll or a spam bot, please check my profile to verify that I am a genuine developer making meaningful contributions to FOSS community.)

I feel that this thread has gradually drifted off-topic and is on the verge of sparking an inflammatory debate. I am not entirely familiar with the democratic process here, but are the internal voters of Codeberg e.V. required to justify their stances? Or are the voting results indisputable, irrevocable, and implemented immediately? Judging from the comments above, this could severely undermine the confidence of many valuable projects and their developers. While I believe that banning scam projects *of any kind* is entirely reasonable, blanket banning an entire category simply because a few scams occurred within it might cause panic in the community: what's next? Will all LLM projects or metaverse-related ones (such as VR projects) be banned as well? I believe it is crucial to draw a clear boundary here and explicitly inform the community about the exact nature of this proposal and which specific list of projects will be affected. (To avoid being mistaken for a troll or a spam bot, please check my profile to verify that I am a genuine developer making meaningful contributions to FOSS community.)

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

I'm not yet a member of the non-profit, but i'm really glad LLM slop and cryptocurrency has been banned from codeberg. These projects are overall a net-negative for society (in orders of magnitude that we fail to comprehend). There's already many hosts online for such projects. I'm glad codeberg is standing for human-crafted projects with benefits for humanity, without pretending that technology is neutral. As much as it pains me, there's already so many places online where people can host cryptocurrency projects and LLM slop.

Of course crypto grifters are already taking positions like we're gonna ban sha256 next. While i would certainly appreciate more transparency in the moderation process (disclaimer: i did not properly research if there's a moderation log / forum), i personally trust the non-profit to keep a sane environment, and at the same time not obey stupid DMCA takedown requests (german law is not US law!).

Keep up with the good work! Codeberg is not Github, and that's for the best!

I'm not yet a member of the non-profit, but i'm really glad LLM slop and cryptocurrency has been banned from codeberg. These projects are overall a net-negative for society (in orders of magnitude that we fail to comprehend). There's already many hosts online for such projects. I'm glad codeberg is standing for human-crafted projects with benefits for humanity, without pretending that technology is neutral. As much as it pains me, there's already so many places online where people can host cryptocurrency projects and LLM slop. Of course crypto grifters are already taking positions like we're gonna ban sha256 next. While i would certainly appreciate more transparency in the moderation process (disclaimer: i did not properly research if there's a moderation log / forum), i personally trust the non-profit to keep a sane environment, and at the same time not obey stupid DMCA takedown requests (german law is not US law!). Keep up with the good work! Codeberg is not Github, and that's for the best!

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

are the internal voters of Codeberg e.V. required to justify their stances? > No. https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/en/election-regulations.md > Or are the voting results indisputable, irrevocable, and implemented immediately? > The changes are implemented immediately but can be edited/amended/revoked in a future vote.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

Hey, here is a great idea: why don't you just list which type of projects _are_ allowed? At this point, given the trend, it's going to be much easier!

Hey, here is a great idea: why don't you just list which type of projects *are* allowed? At this point, given the trend, it's going to be much easier!

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

Context is important. The rule is: "_Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg_, such as cryptocurrency related projects" and it's a part of the "You must not share any content that's expressing hate or encouraging violence towards a person or group for any reason." rule.

If a project does not harm the reputation of Codeberg (e.g. by scamming people or doing other shady stuff) it does not fall under this specific rule. And if it did, it would be a TOS violation even before the change. Cryptocurrency (the scammy kind) was just added as an example here.

With a lot of creativity and a complete lack of trust in Codeberg you could read this backwards as "All remotely cryptocurrency related projects harm Codebergs reputation, so they must be banned" , but that's not what this rule actually says.

Another common argument is that this rule could be abused to attack or harm 'good' projects. We all know how a bad laws (e.g. copyright) can be used as a weapon of suppression. For big platform, it's way easier and also more safe to quickly act on complaints instead of investigating. Users are guilty by default and must prove they are not. Vague rules are very dangerous under those circumstances. The Codeberg TOS situation is fundamentally different though: No one has any 'right' to get AI or crypto projects removed from Codeberg. Trolls cannot file false claims en masse and demand action to get someone else in trouble. If they do, then Codeberg mods can quickly dismiss those false claims, they do not have to disprove them. Banning a project is way more work than not banning it, so there will be no 'purge' and no mass-banning. No one has time for that. We just need to get rid of the worst and most obvious offenders, that's all. Humans with brains will decide on a per-project basis.

Context is important. The rule is: "_Content that harms the reputation of Codeberg_, such as cryptocurrency related projects" and it's a part of the "You must not share any content that's expressing hate or encouraging violence towards a person or group for any reason." rule. If a project does not harm the reputation of Codeberg (e.g. by scamming people or doing other shady stuff) it does not fall under this specific rule. And if it did, it would be a TOS violation even before the change. Cryptocurrency (the scammy kind) was just added as an example here. With a lot of creativity and a complete lack of trust in Codeberg you could read this backwards as "All remotely cryptocurrency related projects harm Codebergs reputation, so they must be banned" , but that's not what this rule actually says. Another common argument is that this rule could be abused to attack or harm 'good' projects. We all know how a bad laws (e.g. copyright) can be used as a weapon of suppression. For big platform, it's way easier and also more safe to quickly act on complaints instead of investigating. Users are guilty by default and must prove they are not. Vague rules are very dangerous under those circumstances. The Codeberg TOS situation is fundamentally different though: No one has any 'right' to get AI or crypto projects removed from Codeberg. Trolls cannot file false claims en masse and demand action to get someone else in trouble. If they do, then Codeberg mods can quickly dismiss those false claims, they do not have to disprove them. Banning a project is way more work than not banning it, so there will be no 'purge' and no mass-banning. No one has time for that. We just need to get rid of the worst and most obvious offenders, that's all. Humans with brains will decide on a per-project basis.

First-time contributor

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

edit: apologies, @dpk confirmed @defnull's interpretation of the new rule. still, it's obviously ambiguous and the fact that you must dig into a thread to find out what the rule actually means is truly bizarre to me. there is no world in which "Disallow cryptocurrency projects" means something else other than disallowing all cryptocurrency projects.

original comment @defnull wrote in #1254 (comment):

If a project does not harm the reputation of Codeberg (e.g. by scamming people or doing other shady stuff) it does not fall under this specific rule. And if it did, it would be a TOS violation even before the change. Cryptocurrency (the scammy kind) was just added as an example here.

With a lot of creativity and a complete lack of trust in Codeberg you could read this backwards as "All remotely cryptocurrency related projects harm Codebergs reputation, so they must be banned" , but that's not what this rule actually says.

I'm sorry, but the very subject line of this PR ("Disallow cryptocurrency projects") and the header text at the top of the page:

...back up the way everybody interpreted the new rule, the one you call a "backwards" interpretation. this doesn't say that cryptocurrency-related projects are added as an example of reputation harm; they are specifically added as a category of projects that are now disallowed (banned, prohibited, however you wanna call it) from Codeberg.

this is also the way SourceHut made their decision, which is the one that Codeberg bases their decision now. so, respectfully, no, you are not correct.

edit: apologies, @dpk confirmed @defnull's interpretation of the new rule. still, it's obviously ambiguous and the fact that you must dig into a thread to find out what the rule actually means is truly bizarre to me. there is no world in which "Disallow cryptocurrency projects" means something else other than disallowing all cryptocurrency projects. <details><summary>original comment</summary> @defnull wrote in https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254#issuecomment-19923979: > If a project does not harm the reputation of Codeberg (e.g. by scamming people or doing other shady stuff) it does not fall under this specific rule. And if it did, it would be a TOS violation even before the change. Cryptocurrency (the scammy kind) was just added as an example here. >> With a lot of creativity and a complete lack of trust in Codeberg you could read this backwards as "All remotely cryptocurrency related projects harm Codebergs reputation, so they must be banned" , but that's not what this rule actually says. I'm sorry, but the very subject line of this PR ("Disallow cryptocurrency projects") and the header text at the top of the page:  ...back up the way everybody interpreted the new rule, the one you call a "backwards" interpretation. this doesn't say that cryptocurrency-related projects are added as an example of reputation harm; they are specifically added as a category of projects that are now disallowed (banned, prohibited, however you wanna call it) from Codeberg. this is also the way SourceHut made their decision, which is the one that Codeberg bases their decision now. so, respectfully, no, you are not correct. </details>

Owner

[](https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1254)

Copy link

The presidium of Codeberg has decided to lock this thread due to apparent brigading by users from external sites.

We would like to stress that the decision to accept this ToU change was taken by the Codeberg e.V. membership as a whole. We are a grassroots democratic organization by our constitution. Any e.V. member who is so unhappy with this change is welcome to propose an amendment reversing the change at the next assembly.

We would also like to refer to the comment by @defnull concerning the interpretation of this amendment.

The presidium of Codeberg has decided to lock this thread due to apparent brigading by users from external sites. We would like to stress that the decision to accept this ToU change was taken by the Codeberg e.V. membership as a whole. We are a grassroots democratic organization by our constitution. Any e.V. member who is so unhappy with this change is welcome to propose an amendment reversing the change at the next assembly. We would also like to refer to the comment by @defnull concerning the interpretation of this amendment.

This discussion has been locked. Commenting is limited to contributors.