Recently we celebrated Trans Day of Visibility, but words alone aren't enough.

[proficiency@mastodon.social]

@gnome ️

[disorderlyf@todon.eu]

@gnome As much as I disagree with a lot of the decisions made by Gnome, this was a breath of fresh air. I worry people are losing the importance of that. Some of the things Gnome does makes me want to tear my hair out and maybe also theirs, but their trans staff is still whatever gender they say they are. Yes, even the "made up" ones. (all genders are made up but that's a different convo)

This is bigger than Systemd vs OpenRC or Wayland vs X11. This matters even if you're not trans. If you warrant bigotry for one group, you warrant it for all. Whether or not you're in those crosshairs is only a matter of time.

And that's before we get into the privacy benefits that apply to everyone from this policy

[beaiouns@is.nota.live]

@gnome I'm liking this trend of phrasing stuff like this. "Not your legal name, your real name"

[archivescribe@mastodon.social]

@gnome This is why we love GNOME, as a project and desktop environment.

[cargobikedad@mastodon.social]

@gnome ️

[belenos@mastodon.social]

@gnome ️

[furrybeta@shark.community]

@gnome While I’m not a developer and I prefer a different window manager/desktop, I much appreciate your support

[em0nm4stodon@infosec.exchange]

@gnome This is the way

[tragivictoria@mastodon.catgirl.cloud]

@beaiouns@is.nota.live @gnome@floss.social That's the truth, is this not? :3

[oiimrosabel@lgbtqia.space]

@gnome THANK YOU TWT

[tragivictoria@mastodon.catgirl.cloud]

@tastytea@very.tastytea.de @gnome@floss.social No. However we didn't had a formal process and it mostly came down to feelings of a certain someone.

Then after a… certain incident lawyer was contacted and it was formally cleared up.

[tretron@bark.lgbt]

@gnome based

[gnome@floss.social]

@tastytea we used to say a “legal name” was required in some places, but no, we have never done ID verification. Membership is based on demonstrable contribution and social proof, where existing members vouch for new applicants.

After consulting with and discussing within the community (and seeking legal clarification of our obligations under California/US nonprofit law), we updated our process to explicitly not require “legal” names, instead emphasizing that applicants just use… their name.