It all started with the unofficial godot discord admin dealing with some chuds and people turning their ire towards the Godot Foundation staff instead.
Since Godot has stubbornly remained on the Xitter nazi bar as a valid space for PR and social media interaction and dared to promote the Wokot hashtag and reiterate their progessiveness, the reactionaries infesting that space are now piling on their socials and harassing everyone they can get their eyes on.
Examples
- https://x.com/LifeArtStudios/status/1840230152254509067
- https://x.com/Grummz/status/1840162056928145740
- https://x.com/madewithgodot/status/1841118786964840618
Anyway, solidarity with the targets of harassment. I hope they finally realize that Xitter is a lost cause.
Update: Godot is being review-bombed
Fortunately the reactionary backlash seems to be having the opposite effect
That’s good and all…
But how do you pronounce Wokot?
Is it wuh-ko?
Maybe Woke-o?I MUST KNOW
@yetAnotherUser @db0 I have to assume, despite the spelling, that it is pronounced Whacko…Not even as a diss, just would find it incredibly amusing. “And dot” is right there too! idk.
I stand in solidarity with Godot.
I feel like it’s important to note that eating, breathing, and having a fun time with friends are all very LGBTQ+ activities! #woke
I long for the days when people didn’t call any concept they disagreed with “political.”
Oh so you’re a conservative!
/s
It was just a tweet… And then they say that the “wokes” are the hypersensitive snowflakes?
It’s always projection.
Nice to see some figures on the change in support levels. I was donating €5 a month and I’ve bumped it up to €50 for the next few months.
I get the impression that a lot of the people complaining on twitter are not even gamedevs and don’t know what Godot is, it’s just the reactionary pile-on du jour.
This is evident in a few ways:
- How they subtly or glaringly misunderstand what it is and what it does
- How they call it “a company”
- How they pronounce it as GO-DOT
I’m new here, and I’ve been calling it “go-dot”. What’s the correct pronunciation?
It sounds like G-DOUGH.
The lead developer Juan Linietsky pronounces it go-dot as well, though with the emphasis on the second syllable (arguably just a matter of accent). I also prefer that pronunciation. A lot of people pronounce it as if it’s French, since it happens to have a name that’s also known from a French play (see: the other replies).
I think it’s a GIF situation. Either way is broadly acceptable (though some people gatekeep on it; see above).
@overcast5348 @moormaan The correct pronounciation is “Guh-Doh” or “Go-Doh”. Honestly, a lot of people pronounce it Go-dot, so it isn’t a big deal. But it is based of the play “Waiting for Godot” where they usually pronounce it like I have mentioned.
a lot of the people complaining on twitter are not even gamedevs and don’t know what Godot is
You’re probably right. Homophobes aren’t the brightest of the bunch.
deleted by creator
… since when did the project have customers lol?
is a service or product receiver only a customer if they are paying money?
I wouldn’t say it has to be money. Just that it has to be a formal exchange. I’d say the open source donation model is more “informal”.
I guess technically businesses like Microsoft were customers; I think there was something about them paying Godot to support C#.
The flagbearer is ofc grummz, the terminally online ex-gamedev chud who turned to shit every game he touched and has had his right-wing grifting platform on Xitter massively boosted in recent years.
I don’t know shit about the situation (I don’t use twitter), but not being on the same side as Mark “Physiognomy” Kern seems like the right call.
Unsurprisingly most gamedevs, at least the ones that make good games, are either minorities themselves, or positive to their/our plight
After all, the best art isn’t made by the people who enshrine conservative ideals
Fortunately the reactionary backlash seems to be having the opposite effect
That’s good I suppose.
I don’t care what happens on Twitter. Just so long as the codebase isn’t negatively affected.
I have been seeing some drama YouTubers, who are clearly blowing this out of proportion, talk a lot about this. One thing they’ve been saying that concerns me however, is that apparently there have been people getting banned from help forums and even the GitHub for criticism.
My understanding is that “woke” is a loosely defined political term, so I think requesting Godot be kept free from politics in response to this stuff isn’t something that should require a ban.
Perhaps there were people going too far and getting rightfully banned and some innocent people got caught in the crossfire?
There shouldn’t be any way the MIT license can discriminate between “woke” and “anti-woke”. Godot can be used by everyone. This is just making the drama people lose their credibility. Regardless of what the devs views on this situation are, I could never expect them to come to a decision on this issue so quickly. Let alone act on it. Their main priority should be the code, not the community. Unofficial communities can pop up on their own and self govern.
I am begging you to stop giving credit to drama youtubers, they do not care about the facts and are only in it to farm views.
Oh. Ok. Thank you.
My understanding is that “woke” is a loosely defined political term, so I think requesting Godot be kept free from politics in response to this stuff isn’t something that should require a ban.
I’m a bit 50/50 on that. If they got kinda harassed to the point where they take a simple stance as they did, then saying “please stop being political” is often used as a thin veiled attempt to say “I don’t like your politics” by the people who get so hard triggered by that term, and women, and LGBT stuff, and people of color, etc.
We can see this all the time in other areas too, especially gaming. As soon as a game has a female main character, or even a female main character that isn’t white, or even one that is lesbian or bi, then uppercase Gamers collectively lose their shit. Say something about Nazis? Or Russia? “HoW DaRe YoU BrInG PoLiTiCs InTo MY GaMes!” …
Not saying that was the guy’s intend when he replied that to Godot, but I can see how it could be interpreted as such when they get brigaded by a bunch of toxic replies.
This never crossed my mind, but you are right. Online interactions do lack a lot of context, and it must have been hard (or practically impossible) to discern genuine from malicious calls to remain apolitical in a situation of intense online harassment.
That’s why it’s considered good practice to act on the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
You’re fully entitled to use Godot if you’re an asshole.
You’re not inherently entitled to interact with their development process or get their help, etc. They aren’t obligated to deal with bullshit to run an open source project.
One thing they’ve been saying that concerns me however, is that apparently there have been people getting banned from help forums and even the GitHub for criticism.
Perhaps there were people going too far and getting rightfully banned and some innocent people got caught in the crossfire?
They’ve addressed that:
We unequivocally condemn this abuse. The volume of negative engagement overwhelmed our moderation efforts. While attempting to protect the Godot community we mistakenly blocked individuals who were not participating in the harassment. The Godot Foundation Board takes full responsibility for these moderation actions. If you believe you were blocked in error and have not violated our Code of Conduct, please contact us with the form linked below. We are committed to swiftly rectifying any mistakes. We firmly stand by our mission to keep our community spaces free from hate, discrimination, and other toxic behaviors. - The Godot Foundation Board
Thanks.
And there have been 5 people banned from GitHub due to racist and homophobic slurs, which violates Godot CoC and GH ToS.
I don’t think these users were providing valid criticism. Never mind the fact that GH issues are not really the place to complain about some twitter drama.
Open source software is the wokest shit possible… It’s pretty much digital communism run by the gayest furries you’ll ever meet.
With programming socks 🧦
Anyway love OSS ❤️
But there comes Brian Lundurke with his “um ackchually, if it were digital communism the state would be forcing you to make it open source, capitalism is when small state”.
Left libertarianism is a thing too! One difference is employee ownership of companies as opposed to state or private ownership of companies.
I know, I’m a left-libertarian, but people that are dumb for politics and think left=authoritarianism right=liberty.
I bookmarked this comment. It’s beautiful
I can’t tell if you intent this as a positive or a negative, but it very much an accurate assessment.
Why would you think it was negative? My only guess would be the way Leninists like to cosplay as Communists. And the way the west likes to smear communists by associating them with leninists.
Positive. I love FOSS culture, for the most part.
Love the communist gay furry part of it, the digital part not so much.
It kinda depends on the license. Copyleft licenses are definitely digital communism–but licenses like CC or other extremely permissive licenses are digital libertarianism. I’m good with it in any case.
cc-by-sa is copyleft
It’s actually really funny to see review bomb attempts on a non-profit FOSS project. No shareholders to appease, no profits to they need to protect, just a community of people contributing to the tool they use.
I’d say, it’s a bit concerning since review bombing can turn away people who are uncertain about using Godot, or donating to it.
I would be curious how many people in that boat find themselves looking at steam reviews in order to make a decision. It didn’t even occur to me until this happened that the reviews exist.
I also did not know the page existed
I’d hope that people using reviews have figured out by now that you don’t just go by the summary but actually read some of the reviews to see if the issues even resonate with you.
Personally, a bunch of negative reviews whining about how woke something is would make me dismiss the negative reviews in general, so this could give it a boost with people like me, just from drowning out more legitimate complaints.
I mean, if it was a game and not an engine I had already started playing around with.
As a dev, seeing a bunch of reactionary fuck heads criticising Godot would make it more appealing. I like working with good people
Tbh I’m not sure what your examples are supposed to demonstrate. Blocking someone for saying they should focus on the engine and not politics is astonishingly thin skinned
Kind of hard to follow the thread of most of this but they sure aren’t disproving how woke they are by blocking people who even slightly disagree with them.
Also it’s just “X” not “Xitter”.
astonishingly thin skin
Could be that, but remember that all skin can be damaged. If you’ve been badly burned then maybe it’s best to keep the environment sterile. “Focus on the engine and not politics” can be the conclusion of people with merely a simple goal of a good game engine, but suppose that it can also be argued for with a goal of harming minorities by silencing them due to hate/fear.
@tabular @FizzyOrange would hardly even call blocking people for saying, mind you in a thread literally only asking people to post their inclusive games, that they are going to post the most offensive, racist things they can find (their words, not mine)…“thin skinned”
the nazi bar sure can twist a narrative though :/
I really like this extension of the “thin-skinned” idiom/metaphor
Xitter is simply short for “Elon Musk’s X, formerly known as Twitter, currently known as dumpster fire”
It’s “Xitter”. “X” is nonsense.
You can’t just start calling yourself “X” and decide the word cisgender is a slur now and not expect people to laugh in your face.
It’s not Xitter. I don’t understand why you think it is. I don’t know what your cisgender comment is talking about.
they sure aren’t disproving how woke they are
Why do you think that they need to be doing this?
Because being woke is generally considered to be a bad thing? (Even if people disagree about what counts as woke.)
If you want to take your emotions out of it, remember “political correctness gone mad”? That’s basically the 90s “woke” and nobody would aspire to it.
Ah, so you don’t actually know what you’re talking about! The word “woke” has turned into a toxic term used by the generally hateful to describe anything they don’t agree with socially (aka heteronormative white male). It’s pretty obvious when you look at most the people using the term negatively.
There’s no shame in not knowing something and you’ve got a bit of learning to catch up on, good luck!
Because being woke is generally considered to be a bad thing?
No. Being woke is only considered bad in toxic echo chambers where they’ve tried to poison the word.
Most people who self report as “anti-woke” repeat infectious and carefully crafted but fallacious talking points whenever the term “woke” is said.
But if you bring up a situation where a minority is getting the bad end of the stick and they agree with you that it’s bad, they don’t realise that they themselves are being woke. They agree with being woke so long as the label “woke” isn’t used. It’s when you point that out that they start to realise that they’ve been poisoned against the term.
Being woke simply means that some people don’t often get the same affordances as others.
If you accept the general fact that women tend to get paid less for the same amount of work, then you’re woke.
If you accept the general fact that black people might not get hired if a person doing the hiring is racist, then you’re woke.
If you accept the general fact that some people have to hide the fact that they’re not heterosexual in some countries otherwise they’ll suffer the death penalty, then you’re woke.
Being woke simply means that some people don’t often get the same affordances as others.
See I think that’s not what the “anti-woke” people think it means. Turning to urban dictionary, they’re using this definition:
Umbrella term for individuals who are engrossed by social justice and thinks of themselves as saviors with a moral high ground, but remain willfully ignorant to the irrationality of their claims and the problems they create. These individuals give special treatment to certain minorities in hopes of ending racism and perpetuate mental illnesses as the norm.
Irrespective of whether or not anyone actually is woke, I hope you agree that it wouldn’t be a good thing (according to that definition).
See I think that’s not what the “anti-woke” people think it means.
That’s exactly what I pointed out. The people who provide them their information are actively trying to poison the word to the point that it means something else. But it doesn’t, because the poisoning only works in the echo chambers that spread that information.
Turning to urban dictionary, they’re using this definition: […]
That would be one of the attempts to poison the word. It’s worth pointing out that anyone can add a definition to urban dictionary and it’s quite often that trolls try to overwhelm existing definitions on there.
[…] (according to that definition).
That comes back to what I said before. People who self report as anti-woke are against anything that uses the label “woke”, until they look at what’s under the label and they realise they aren’t against any of the points the “woke” labelled thing is doing.
They’re not actually anti-woke, they’re anti-incorrect-label.
I think you’re in your own echo chamber. It’s not an attempt to poison the word, that’s just how its meaning has gradually evolved.
If you ask the general public - not far left people on Twitter - I think they would be more likely to agree with the definition I linked rather than the original definition (you have "woke"n up to social injustice, which is obviously a good thing).
(I’ll except the “perpetuate mental illnesses as the norm” bit - I think that is veering into the far right rather than what the man on the Clapham omnibus actually thinks.)
‘Xitter’ is pronounced ‘Shitter’ and is common a playful joke
Ah I see. I would pronounce it “Zitter” but fair enough. I guess if you’re Chinese?
English doesn’t really have a well defined way to write down the “zjush” from the “su” in pleasure.
The most accepted ways are “zh” or “x” in English, or
ʒin IPA.Since most people call it twitter, and Elon want to call it x, so people push them together to make xitter, because it sounds like “shitter” (the crude term for toilet) and because the quality of twitter has declined dramatically to the point that it resembles an unclean toilet.
Interesting. I think zjitter would be the closest I would intuitively pronounce that way.
I don’t really know anything about the quality of X but I think resorting to name calling is insanely. (Some with Micro$oft etc. - haven’t seen that one for a while!)
Also it’s just “X” not “Xitter”.
Same energy
This has nothing to do with Musk. Honestly these kinds of dismissive comments just make everyone else seem more reasonable.
I didn’t know it was because of them supporting LGBTQ+, mostly because they’ve been doing that for a very long time now and very publicly. I thought most of the backlash stemmed from this;
From what I’ve read, that person is not officially affiliated with the Godot project. They just moderate an unofficial Discord server that is Godot-related.
Oh okay that helps a lot, Thanks. I guess a lot of people are trying to spin it like this is the official server.
Reactionaries don’t tend to care much about reality after they’ve created something to be mad about
It used to be the only Godot server, but I don’t think it was ever labeled “official”
Correct, it was the biggest most known one. Godot kind of pointed towards it with the message “We don’t officially do discord, but here is a big one that is unofficial”. Always felt like this was to not fragment it into 20 discord servers.
Some people claiming that it was “practically the official one” are bending the truth to fit a narrative to say the least.
The unofficial server yet lots of people don’t know that because they were official until they suddenly weren’t but then lots of these same mods are mods on the actual official discord.
Wow, now that I have some context, I’m an even bigger fan of Godot than before. Supporting LGBTQ+ rights isn’t political. If you’re offended because people exist that don’t think like you, then yeah, you can fuck right off somewhere else.
I think it’s the term “woke” that people considered political.
Finally a place I can share my cold takes. (I’m not on Twitter, I won’t discuss this on Reddit either.)
-
The community manager had a meltdown and blocking everyone was a power trip and was wrong.
-
Godot’s tweet was wrong, because it used the word “woke” which immediately drives any conversation into the gutter. Doesn’t matter if you’re on the right or left, as soon as you say the word “woke” you have ruined the conversation.
-
It is good that Godot explicitly supports LGBT+ people. They should be welcome. The community CoC should make this explicit, and it does. A tweet to reaffirm this is fine, a cringe joke born from the dredges of Twitter is less fine.
-
Godot’s “revenge forks” are amusing and will not go anywhere. Someone might collect some donations before grifting into the night though.
-
None of this has any effect on Godot’s technical suitability for creating a game.
I’ll share mine too.
The community manager had a meltdown and blocking everyone was a power trip and was wrong.
Apparently they did receive a large number of tweets that genuinely warranted a ban, but some innocent people got caught in the crossfire. If this is true then Godot did the right thing by responding as neutrally as they can and giving people a way to get unbanned. If it’s not, then yeah very wrong.
Additionally, the Twitter manager apparently said some unprofessional stuff on her personal. I think there was something about her requesting a shower pic from a very large controversial streamer. I feel like that sort of action would bring attention from trolls.
Also I think there was something about a discord mod saying some dehumanising things about the “anti woke” people. Even if these people were causing trouble and deserved a ban, you shouldn’t dehumanise them. That will just make them more aggressive and convince them that “woke” people are indeed some kind of adversary.
Godot’s tweet was wrong, because it used the word “woke” which immediately drives any conversation into the gutter. Doesn’t matter if you’re on the right or left, as soon as you say the word “woke” you have ruined the conversation.
I think that word is loosely defined. To the drama people “woke/wokism” seems to relate to the idea of people aggressively wanting all media to contain pro lgbt messaging. I think the official meaning relates to awareness of modern issues. “Woke” seems to be a political term, but people some people feel like calling “woke” political is harmful to lgbt rights?
I think inviting people to present their “wokot” is fine, but it probably shouldn’t be done from an official account.
It is good that Godot explicitly supports LGBT+ people. They should be welcome. The community CoC should make this explicit, and it does. A tweet to reaffirm this is fine, a cringe joke born from the dredges of Twitter is less fine.
Hard agree!
Godot’s “revenge forks” are amusing and will not go anywhere. Someone might collect some donations before grifting into the night though. None of this has any effect on Godot’s technical suitability for creating a game.
Agreed. Give it a year or two. Possibly sooner.
Regardless of what happened and how it will turn out. If Godot increased their budget, even if it was in an unprofessional way, I guess this is an entirely positive thing for people who aren’t on those proprietary social platforms.
as soon as you say the word “woke” you have ruined the conversation.
And as soon as you have “banned” a word from conversation regardless of context, you have ruined your credibility (in my eyes, obviously).
I mean, there are plenty of words that are used almost exclusively to cause offensive. Swears and slurs. Often it can be debatable whether or not a word counts as a swear or slur, but it’s usually pretty clear. I prefer to avoid using words that are intended to cause offence.
The word “woke” doesn’t seem to fall into these categories, but it’s still a term that seems to have been polarised by both groups. I don’t think that word would ruin a discussion that was already political, but it would definitely cause a discussion to become political.
As far as one group is concerned, being “woke” is inherently good and means being aware of modern issues and accepting of marginalised groups.
As far as the other is concerned, being “woke” is requiring all media to have this representation and lashing out when it isn’t inserted in a certain way; thus, you can be supportive of lgbt+ rights and the rights of marginalised groups while still being vehemently “anti woke”.Because of this conflict in definitions it’s understandable that the Twitter manager might want to use this term, and it’s understandable that people would be against it.
I feel the polarisation of this term may be being done for the drama people on both sides to farm engagement.
“Woke” is a problem because people have different definitions, and no matter what Webster or any other authority says the definition is, people will continue to have differing definitions.
How can we reach understanding when we don’t even agree on the definition of words?
This is way to nuanced to deal with on fucking Twitter. If you use the word “woke” on Twitter, expect a lot of misunderstanding, talking past each other, and bad faith arguments to follow.
When something really matters all we have is conversation, or violence. Words do not actually have innate definitions - they have usages that vary between individuals and between peoples over time. If we can understand what the person we’re talking to means then maybe we can come to understand each other.
I agree. That’s why I suggest (or more like implied) that when we know we have different definitions of a word, we avoid using that word. It’s a good thing to at least try if two people really care about understanding.
I agree and did that for the word “homophobia”. Saying it lead to a common response “I’m not afraid” but “having a phobia” wasn’t the subject matter (instead I say “aversion to homosexuality”, though I don’t have that conversation now since leaving Facebook/YouTube years ago).
How can we reach understanding when we don’t even agree on the definition of words?
I actually think this is the reason why there is so much polarization, we are literally talking different languages.
I’m not saying both sides are the same, the opposite actually, one side is willing to use standardized definitions or just use new ones specific to the discussion/debate.
The other side realized they can make people believe in a fascist fantasy by changing the meaning and more importantly, the emotional response behind the meaning.
And it’s not new, this is what it always comes down to. I argue for socialism because I am arguing for cooperating and equal ownership, others argue against it because they (for whatever fucking reason) hear tyranny cause you know, regulations means less freedom.
I did not suggest banning any words.
To understand why I’m opposed to the word “woke”, you must first acknowledge this fact:
Sometimes people have different definitions of the same word.
If you’re willing to accept that, then it logically follows that using a word that people have different definitions of will cause more confusion than understanding. If our goal in speaking is to convey understanding, then that is best accomplished by avoiding words where people have conflicting definitions.
We’ve all learned that there are facts and opinions, but there is a third category: definitions.
If you watch for it, you will see that many disagreements boil down to nothing more than disagreeing about the definition of a single word. If we temporarily avoid using that word, suddenly we find ourselves in agreement, or at least having a better understanding of each other.
This is a pretty common challenge in philosophy with a very obvious solution:
Define the controversial word (or words) at the top. It’s done all the time in science articles or legal documents.
You can even compound it to point out it’s your version (like calling it Lefty-woke).
By avoiding it, imo, you let them win and “claim” the word, since in their worldview, everyone is now using it like them.
Having said that, this is just my approach, I think the issue with politics is that people assume everyone is using the same language. You got to affirm or confirm that first.
Also, ironically, I think we are talking about the same thing, just using different words lol.
I hear you. It’s no good to just cede ownership of a word and allow others to define it however suits them. But… it’s Twitter, getting into a good faith philosophical discussion about the definitions of words ain’t going to happen, so in many cases it’s better to just not bring up the controversial words at all. Guess there’s pros and cons to each.
Yup. I dont give a fuck about politics or the goobers fanning this drama. Im just here to learn game dev
20% by 20%, the progress bar of me agreeing with this assessment went to a 100% as I was reading it.
Revenge fork is a weird name for these forks. A fork is a fork, even a tiny change like changing the logo is a legitimate fork.
If anything if the Godot community could stop harassing the fork owners, that would be great. Them receiving harassment is the most ironic part about this, because there is more proof of that than the harassment the Godot community manager claims they faced.
-
Twitter blows ass and if they hate you you’re probably right.
Not guaranteed. But a solid bet.
That’s a great way to look at it. You’re probably spot on.
Considering game devs are intimately aware of review bombing, I really doubt that it will have much negative effect on their userbase. I guess the next Alex Jones game wont use godot.
You’d think so, but fascists are generally cheap and will happily use whatever they can that’s made by liberals and leftists. See mastodon being created because of a rumor of Peter Theil buying it and then it’s code was used to run Truth social.
The remark is about how few conservative games there even are. Most games I can think of either lean left or have no political commentary in them.
Conservatives aren’t intelligent and making games is hard
seems to be having the opposite effect
unfortunately not for the Steam Reviews overall
Conveniently Godot is not a game and general consumer reviews have no real relevance
I always love watching the g*mers embarrass themselves though.
One day they’ll figure who’s behind all those pesky micro transactions… One day.
