EN: This is a bit of a less rigorous counterpoint of the paper from Nathan Schneider "the tyranny of openness". I think it's interesting to see that despite a few strawmen it reaches a somewhat similar conclusion: it's not just about licenses, it's also about customs".

FR: Un contrepoint moins rigoureux au papier de Nathan Schneider "the tyranny of openness". Je trouve intéressant de voir que malgré quelques "hommes de paille" il arrive à une conclusion un peu similaire: ce n'est pas simplement a propos des licences, c'est aussi à propos des mœurs.

This is a great paper. Truly mind bending in my opinion. In my case it helped me pinpoint things in the FOSS movement which I felt were there while being unable to clearly explain them. This is a clear enabler and explains why we need to move beyond the "licensing and only licensing" position the FOSS movement is in, it's the only chance to finally encompass ethics and economics which are both very much needed. It's the only chance to converge toward proper commons without the faked meritocracy distortion.

I could go on much longer... but it's not the point here. Go read it!

And if you're still wondering "why not more women in the FOSS movement?" or "why are women mostly in community stewardship roles?", well there are answers for that too.

I'll close with two quotes which I found really important in that paper:

"Ehmke stresses that information ethics and social ethics need not be mutually exclusive but that they should coexist. She frequently celebrates what Open Source has achieved through information freedoms and hopes for more through the addition of social ethics. [...] Yet this evolution means being open in new ways and more closed in others."

""The frame of social provisioning reveals how the unrest in Open Source emerges from a cluster of basic concerns that peer production communities have taught themselves to treat as invisible or inadmissible. It remains to be seen whether Open Source can stretch to incorporate more of its participants’ humanity."

Interesting take on why the Open Source movement is a zombie movement and why Free Software failed at the political level. This explains why we see a rise in the "Post-Open Source" term. This leads to potential ways out. It's a bit too much on the heavy marxist reading to my taste but otherwise it contains good criticism