Ah, alright then. I didn’t really understand what your comment was referring to at first.

Hamas is still the legal successor of the PLO in Gaza though?? Everything the PLO signed/declared is valid in Gaza until Hamas revokes it. That’s literally how succession of states/governments works. There hasn’t been a revolution in Gaza, it has been a (relatively) peaceful transfer of power.

This occurs regardless of what you think of one authority. Governments do not void anything and everything the previous government has done.

It’s utterly insane you consider civilians to deserve death. I will never understand how anyone with a working moral compass can justify killing civilians. People like you are the fuel genocide engines run on.

196 countries signed and ratified all 4 Geneva Conventions, with 174 of them having further ratified the procol I quoted.

Most signatories are not “on board” with Israel ignoring this document, unless you somehow believe Western countries are the only countries to matter. And even then, there are various notable dissenters such as Ireland.

The Geneva Convention absolutely apply to international conflict, otherwise no country would bother with upholding them at least partially.

Why does Israel even fight the ICC instead of simply ignoring it? If it had no impact they could save the attorney resources they are spending. It’s because it very much impacts them in terms of international relations. Every single international treaty relies on trust alone. Become untrustworthy and you will get worse deals.

And it does very much apply to Gaza. The internationally recognized representation of the state of Palestine who claim jurisdiction over Gaza has signed it shortly after becoming a non-member state of the UN. There is no country on this planet who has signed the Geneva Convention but considers Gaza to not be bound by it.

Also, before Hamas even existed, the PLO declared themselves bound by the Geneva Conventions. The only reason they didn’t sign the declaration was because the UN didn’t consider Palestine a state. Hamas has not rescinded this declaration from what I have found.

By the way, there is no “application” for civilian status. Either you are a civilian or you are not. And no one on this planet considers reservists to be soldiers unless they intend to kill civilians. A 100 year old Israeli in a hospital bed would be deserving of execution according to your definition.

Ok? Don’t quite know how this relates to my comment about international legislation behind armed conflict and the definition of “civilian” though. Did you respond to the wrong person?

I do not care about what Hamas is or isn’t, nor do I care what Israel says it is or isn’t.

Hamas is bound by Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol 1 of the 4th Geneva Conventions:

Article 1:

(4) The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination.

Article 2:

In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

Palestine is generally considered to be under alien occupation and therefore falls under this protocol.

And what is a combatant?

Article 44:

(1) Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.

Article 43:

(2) Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.

And a civilian?

Article 50

(1) A civilian is any person who does not belong to one of the categories of persons referred to in Article 4 A (1), (2), (3) and (6) of the Third Convention and in Article 43 of this Protocol. In case of doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person shall be considered to be a civilian.

(Note: article 4 A goes into more detail as to who can become a POW. Basically anyone who is armed or accompanies the army during conflict.)

From those articles it clearly follows that reservists who are not activated are civilians.

It does not necessarily follow that Hamas is a terrorist organization, nor have I ever claimed it was. The right to armed resistance is still bound by international law such as this protocol.

Attacking reservists who are not activated violates the Geneva Convention and is nearly universally considered - including by Palestine, which has signed the Geneva Convention - to be a war crime.

This includes civilians - which deactivated reservists are - in occupied areas.

Ukraine is similarly not allowed to attack occupying Russians in Crimea who moved there after 2014, despite the fact all male Russians had military service.

Israel uses the exact same argumentation to kill “combat-aged” men - that is to say, male Palestinians who look 14 or older.

Also, being an occupying civilian during a conflict does not allow an opposing party to arrest them. They are afforded various protections, especially by the 4th Geneva Comvention.

I admit, I was partially wrong. The CoC violations occured outside freedesktop and he received an email from a freedesktop member stating that their CoC does extend outside their immediate project, to some extent.

This isn’t that unreasonable in my opinion, considering that his behavior “reflects on communities like [FreeDesktop] when [they] interact with and accept contributions from hyprland.”

Of course this should only apply to severe CoC violations considering that two different CoCs rarely overlap in full.

So the reason for the ban was that hyprland’s developer published their email exchange and wrote an extensive, surprisingly hostile blog post about it.

I genuinely recommend reading their exchange, I’ve rarely seen this amount of hostility and toxicity in an email exchange - followed up with “I hope we can resolve this constructively” and “I will be seeking legal action if you continue threatening to ban me”.

I’m not actively following it since I stopped using Hyprland around that time.

If there has been significant positive change since then I stand corrected.

No, this was an instance of transphobia in their official Discord community. See this for context.

Another instance is how Hyprland’s developer is banned from contributing to freedesktop.org for repeated COC violations.

Hyprland has a right-wing reactionary community surrounding it. For instance, on their Discord a trans person had their username’s pronouns changed to (who/cares) by a moderator after being upset that they were misgendered.