I just received this email, titled “Your recent Mastodon post” from @dpk on behalf of the Codeberg “Presidium”:

***
Dear Aral Balkan

In your Mastodon post at <mastodon.ar.al/@aral/117041803…> you publically criticized a repository that was hosted on Codeberg, despite linking to an issue thread in which it was made clear that the content should be reported through our usual internal channels for moderation. The repository in question was reviewed by the moderation team and removed. We understand that you suffered reputational damage as a result of this repository’s content, but this does not justify damaging the reputation of Codeberg e.V. in turn. The moderation team is still a volunteer operation and sometimes it takes a few hours for someone to be available to deal with reports or to ensure that consensus exists.

We therefore warn you not to make posts of this kind that could damage the association’s reputation in future. Acting against the interests of the association can be grounds for exclusion from the membership (§5 (5) of the by-laws). If you have issues with content posted on our site in future, please report it to our moderation team at abuse@codeberg.org. In general, reports sent to that email address will usually receive a reply describing what action was taken once the moderation team has considered how to deal with the reported content.

Kind regards
Presidium
***

So, I have a problem with this.

My post in no way damaged the reputation of Codeberg. It publicly asked them to do something about it and to state, publicly, where they stand on an issue. An issue, may I add, that has to do with real people facing actual genocide as we speak. Not to mention I thanked them for making the right decision (mastodon.ar.al/@aral/117043586…). If anything, until this email, it made the organisation look better. Unless, of course, opposing certain genocides is something that damages reputations in Germany.

I do not agree with the public issue being closed either. An issue was reported and the response was not “oh, this is serious, we’ll look into it”. It was, rather, “you reported it wrong. Report the same thing at this other place instead.”

And that other place is an entirely opaque internal system where no one gets to see what decision-making process is employed.

This is not the transparency that should exist in a member-run organisation.

So at the end of the day, I am the one being threatened with being removed from membership while the person who is actively trying to harm genocide victims (codeberg.org/Linux-Is-Best/) is still welcome on Codeberg?

This is a very insidious form of bothsidesism and, I can only imagine, is to ensure that I keep quiet in the future and to create a chilling effect where we cannot discuss certain things publicly for fear of reprisals.

Well, that won’t be happening.

I am sick and tired of people who cannot provide a proportional response when asked to choose between people harming genocide victims on the one hand and those trying to protect them on the other.

If this means I cannot be a member of Codeberg, so be it.

Let me know if I’m not welcome there and I will leave.

And you can show the world that Linux-Is-Best is welcome and I am not. If that’s who you are.

#codeberg #israel #germany #zionism #genocide #ethnicCleansing #apartheid #settlerColonialism #fediverse #mastodon #transparency #ethics #morals

Linux-Is-Best

Describe myself? Why? Who I believe I am is irrelevant to who you're going to believe me to be.

^Codeberg.org

Aral Balkan

2026-08-05 07:49:52

RE: mastodon.ar.al/@aral/117036096…

Dear @Codeberg,

According to the anonymous Linux-Is-Best account, I am a scammer and Gaza Verified (gaza-verified.org), which I made and help run, is a scam, and every person from Gaza we verified using video calls – all 303 of them, by last count¹ – is also a scammer.

(Please see: codeberg.org/Codeberg/Communit…)

This presents a problem because I am also a part of the Codeberg organisation as an active member with voting rights.

And the Gaza Verified source code is hosted on Codeberg:
codeberg.org/small-web/gaza-ve…

(We’re clearly a very transparent scam operation that believes in FOSS, etc.)

So, if Linux-Is-Best is right, you are harbouring a known scammer in your organisation. Furthermore, by allowing the source code of the scam on your site, you could be held liable if you know of the scam but do nothing about it.

So, please:

1. Either remove me as an active member (and give me notice so I can cancel my direct debit and have time to migrate my account and projects elsewhere), or

2. Take down the libellous claims by this anonymous troll who is causing real harm to people facing genocide in Gaza (and who is thus, himself, complicit in genocide).

So I’m either a scammer and I should not be allowed to be part of the Codeberg organisation or the anonymous Linux-Is-Best is a libellous, genocide-complicit troll and should not be welcome at Codeberg. Because both of these cannot be true at the same time.

I’ll leave it to you to decide who you would rather want associated with Codeberg.

It shouldn’t be a very difficult decision to make.

¹ gaza-verified.org/people/

#Gaza #GazaVerified #genocide #libel #LinuxIsBest #fediverse #mastodon #Codeberg

♲ @aral@mastodon.ar.al:

Dear @Codeberg,
As an active member, I’d like to know what action will be taken against LinuxIsBest – the person mentioned below – and his account.

He is using Codeberg to spread Zionist lies about Gaza Verified (gaza-verified.org) and attempting to get people to mass block verified accounts of people on the fediverse facing genocide in Gaza at the hands of Israel.

As an anti-fascist organisation, I can only assume this goes against what we hold to be acceptable behaviour on our platform.

Thank you.

#genocide #Israel #zionism #hasbara #Gaza #GazaVerified #codeberg @katzenberger tldr.nettime.org/@katzenberger…

Racism and defamation / ToU violation / Misuse of Codeberg as a file hosting site

### Comment The project "[Linux-Is-Best / Personal-Fediverse-List](https://codeberg.org/Linux-Is-Best/Personal-Fediverse-List)" is harboring, despite the word "personal" in its title, an account blocking list `BLOCK_gaza_verified_scam.

^Codeberg.org

#Review: Spider-Man: Brand New Day – A #Hero for the #Surveillance State?

source: themoviedb.org/movie/969681-sp…

At first, #Spider-Man: Brand New Day looks like another emotional #superhero #story. Peter Parker has lost everything. No one remembers him, not even MJ. He searches for his #identity while trying to protect #NewYork. The #film spends much of its time on #trauma, #loneliness, and #mental #health.

But behind this personal story lies a political #message. The film presents mass surveillance as something necessary and even heroic. This is where the #movie becomes much more interesting—and much more troubling.

Spider-Man uses powerful surveillance #technology to watch the city. He collects video from many security cameras. He scans every face to find criminals. Even the #police admit that this is probably #illegal. Still, the film treats these actions as acceptable because Spider-Man is one of the "good guys."

Jean Grey—now portrayed by Sadie Sink (She kept her role a huge secret beforehand for marketing reasons.) in the Marvel Universe—falls into the facial recognition trap set by Spider-Man's surveillance program. If, by the end, you feel sorry for Jean Grey because the script wants you to and you’ve let yourself be swept up in the drama, then please remember that at the beginning of the movie, Jean possessed an old man and sent him running into the street so he would be brutally run over. She’s a mass murderer who’ll stop at nothing to achieve her goal. She could easily achieve this goal with her incredible superpower, but she makes it unnecessarily complicated by first freeing the Scorpion, which is what draws Spider-Man's attention to her in the first place.

This idea has a long #history in popular culture. The strongest comparison is George Orwell's 1984. #Orwell imagined a #society where every citizen is watched. Surveillance is presented as a tool for #security, but it destroys #freedom. In Brand New Day, the situation is different because Spider-Man is a hero, not a dictator. Yet the basic question remains the same: Who watches the watchers? If one person can see everyone, who controls that person?

The film never really asks this #question. Instead, it assumes that surveillance is good as long as the right people #control it. This is one of its biggest #weaknesses.

Another interesting comparison is The Dark Knight. In Christopher Nolan's film, #Batman creates a machine that can monitor every mobile phone in Gotham. Lucius Fox calls it too dangerous because it gives one person unlimited power. Batman agrees. He uses the system only once to catch the #Joker and then destroys it immediately.

Brand New Day takes a very different approach. Spider-Man's surveillance technology is not treated as a #moral #problem. Instead, it becomes a normal #tool of #crime fighting. The ethical debate that makes The Dark Knight so powerful is almost completely missing.

The transcript also compares Spider-Man's work with modern surveillance technology. Peter Parker works closely with the Department of Damage Control and helps collect huge amounts of personal data. The review argues that this creates a positive image of a close relationship between #government institutions and powerful technology companies.

This makes the film feel surprisingly modern. Today, governments and private companies collect enormous amounts of digital information. Cameras, facial recognition, smartphones and artificial #intelligence make surveillance easier than ever before. The movie reflects this reality but rarely questions it.

One of the most interesting contradictions is #PeterParker himself. He wants #privacy for his own life. He hides his identity and wants to escape public attention. At the same time, he watches everyone else and scans thousands of faces. The film never fully explores this contradiction.

This creates an uncomfortable message. Privacy seems important for the hero but less important for ordinary citizens.

The citizens themselves hardly have a voice. They mostly watch, cheer and accept Spider-Man's actions without #discussion. They never decide whether they want to live in such a #society. They simply #trust the hero.

As #entertainment, Spider-Man: Brand New Day offers impressive visuals and emotional performances. However, its political ideas deserve much more attention. The film normalizes mass surveillance while presenting it as an act of kindness and #responsibility. It replaces difficult ethical questions with emotional storytelling.

Unlike 1984, it does not warn us about surveillance. Unlike The #DarkKnight, it does not seriously question its use. Instead, it asks the #audience to trust the hero completely.

That may be the film's most surprising message. The greatest danger is not an #evil government forcing surveillance on its people. The greater danger is that we willingly accept surveillance because it is carried out by someone we like.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day succeeds as an emotional superhero #drama. As a political film, however, it raises fascinating questions without giving convincing answers.

#cinema #criticism #fail #ethics #future #cybersecurity #ice #palantir #homelandsecurity #america #nyc #ny #humanity #humanrights #marvel #news #politics #policestate #police #bigbrother #propaganda #lawandorder #justice