← Back to context

Comment by sgp_

5 days ago

Hey, I'm Justin from the 501(c)(3) fiscal host of Privacy Guides, MAGIC Grants. Us board members administer the funds for Privacy Guides, and we are different people than those who are on the Privacy Guides committee.

I assure you that Privacy Guides has not made a deal with Brave or any other of the tools that it recommends on the website. I'm happy to address any other questions about raising funds if you have them.

There are lengthy discussions about whether to recommend a tool or not on the Privacy Guides GitHub and their forum. There is a lot of great context there.

I don't doubt PrivacyGuides but...

> There are lengthy discussions about whether to recommend a tool or not on the Privacy Guides GitHub and their forum

The process doesn't strike me as consensus driven? Mods/team have become gatekeepers (both for persisting with existing recommendations or adding new ones), including aggressively shutting down conversations/threads they personally don't like (I was told, all moderation actions are final, regardless of who on the team does it, even if why they did it doesn't hold water). I imagine, such a rigid setup is in response to prevent bad faith actors (but then, I lose count of how many times team/mods have called others "extremist", using it as a slur, just because ... reasons).

It is hard to definitively prove ulterior motive, but other folks do observe such nefariousness and come to their own conclusions, valid or not, as GP has done.

All that to say, the way it is currently run, "discussions happened" isn't really the defence you think it is.