-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
chaos.jetzt serves user-excluding chat software #20
Comments
Do you have any suggestions? |
matrix-ircd (#17 ) could fix this problem. I am not really a fan of replacing matrix with something else, I would rather like to make it more accessible. |
The proposal was not to replace Matrix as such, but rather the Riot client. IRC bridging is sufficient, yes, but a technical burden not everyone can easily overcome. |
The problem here is, that there are not that many alternative clients, at least not for web. (Alternatives for desktop and mobile exist). I never really used IRC, although I know a relatively easy to use IRC-client: thelounge.chat |
Quassel is also pretty nice as an IRC client (at least the quassel-client, setting up a quassel-server may be a bit of a hassle). |
I'm not a fan of mirroring every matrix room to an irc channel, because we have a matrix-appservice-irc bridge not because we want to use irc, but because of old people |
Matrix can have nice and pretty features as one may like, if people are unable to use them those are just not available. And when IRC works for people as mentioned by @nkreer it's unfair to dismiss it as "old-mans chat service". We rather should, in my opinion, talk about how we can mirror new rooms in a efficient fashion. |
I didn't mean to imply that we should exclude people. What i meant to say is that imho we should focus on a screen reader friendly web Matrix client instead of support a hole new communication network, which had its best time in 2002. |
Currently, chaos.jetzt serves the screen reader-inaccessible riot-web Matrix client from its infrastructure. Even though Riot is developed under a Free Software license, it doesn't fully adhere to the four freedoms of Free Software and thus cannot be considered it.
I suggest a replacement is found or an accessible alternative is promoted through group and website communication.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: