Comment by benrutter

To explain where I'm coming from a bit more, my thinking is something like:

"open source" where crucial parts of making a system work, or where the project scoops up eager contributors and them schisms the community once it's finished using their work, tends to have a negative effect.

If those projects were more explicitly either "closed source"/"source accessible" etc, then the open source community could focus their efforts on projects that actually embraced genuine openness and hackability.

Of course - I'd rather there was more actual open source. But what I really want is for "open source" to be some marker saying "this is a project that's open and built by/for the community".