Framework makes repairable technology and established an ecosystem of easily-upgraded modular components to go with their ultraportable laptops and tiny desktop PCs. But support for a project from David Heinemeier Hansson, creator of Ruby on Rails and disliker of muslims, immigrants, and the other usual suspects, has users upset. From the conflagration at Framework's community page:
Omarchy is authored by David Heinemeier Hansson, also known as DHH, probably best known as the author of Ruby on Rails but also a racecar driver, apparently. DHH is also a right-wing conspiracy nut, who seem to believe in the great displacement theory [and] was also involved in the recent upheaval in the Ruby community, where Rubygems, a core component of the Ruby ecosystem, was the victim of a hostile takeover, which DHH supported. Even if you would decide (questionably) to ignore the man and take only his technical merit, the recent Rubygems drama should give anyone pause. So my question is: where does Framework stand around this?
Framework framed its support on "big tent" grounds.
We support open source software (and hardware), and partner with developers and maintainers across the ecosystem. We deliberately create a big tent, because we want open source software to win. We don't partner based on individuals' or organizations' beliefs, values, or political stances outside of their alignment with us on increasing the adoption of open source software.
This might be cast as "geek fallacy"-esque reply, where the Framework team assumes that they're all just doing computer work here and anyone's views outside of school don't and shouldn't matter to the project. Another factor may be the impression, given by mainstream media, that special guys with extremist political ideas can decloak now without it being a big deal. The problem with this framing is that they have products to sell, and customers and users who may think differently. Suboptimal responses haven't helped.
With all due respect, I think you profoundly misunderstand the nature of my concern here. This is not a "I do not like this distribution" kind of argument. This is a "the people you are sending my money to want me and my friends dead or deported" kind of argument.
This appears to be a fair if heightened representation of Hannson's views. His politics are expressed in a variety of postings and are summarized as extremely right-wing:
He thinks that even if you were born in the UK, you only count as British if you're white.
He wouldn't consider living in London specifically because it has too many people of color.
He uses racist tropes to accuse Asian men of being dangerous predators who attack white women.
He pushes debunked conspiracy theories about immigrants replacing white people.
He finds a march where speakers called for banning all non-Christian religions and ethnically cleansing immigrants "heartwarming".
Finally — and maybe most alarmingly — he argues that all of the above is normal and not extreme.
Update: Here's a good overview from Gardiner Bryant:
