Does law speech kill community projects?

Over the last few days, there has been quite some discussion about the new terms of use (TOS) of mastodon.social.

Something similar happened months ago with Mozilla/Firefox.

Rules are essentially a good thing.

They aim to provide clarity and security to all involved parties.

Both projects failed miserably in their respective attempts.

People with extensive knowledge of the subject have debated endlessly

1/5

#Mastodon #Fediverse #Mozilla #Firefox

the pros and cons, as well as the possible consequences of the respective new TOS.

So much for "clarity"!

It might be that the new sets of rules provide a certain legal armour for the entities providing the respective services.

Maybe. Or not. Who knows?

In any case, they definitely don't for the users of the "products".

With 99%, I don't think, I overestimate the percentage of users who have no clue what the new TOS mean for them and their data.

The most dire consequence

2/5

of this uncertainty is that people involved in the projects and their users turn their backs towards them.

Even many, who don't, lose their enthusiasm for their engagement.

Community projects are nothing without the passion of those involved.

Losing it, is a steep price for providing the involved entities with a supposed legal coverage.

I reckon, one of the main reasons for the insecurity such TOS creates, is the language used in them.

I speak English as a foreign language to a certain

3/5