Groupthink

The rhetoric, narrative, and underlying mentality of the Godot community can be encapsulated in the following phrase: “You should not criticize Godot.” This satirical video illustrates this social dynamic:

In many cults, there is a strong emphasis on maintaining a unified belief system, and any challenge or criticism is often seen as an outside threat. Godot may fake openness by pretending to be receptive to criticism, as Godot’s community managers like Nat do in order to control the narrative:

Godot’s community managers may be trying to identify users and contributors within the Godot community who are more critical or outspoken, with the intention of keeping a closer eye on them and finding out who they can trust. Some who are more critical of Godot, but still remain Godot believers, share some insights about Nat. For example, the former moderator of Godot’s Discord server shares her experiences with the Godot team, including Nat and Yuri:

The vast majority of waiters for Godot won’t see this as a problem, insisting that they are misunderstood, misinterpreted, or even say that something is taken out of context, that it only seems weird because people don’t know enough about them, or information presented in a book such as this one mostly stems from disgruntled former members with axes to grind, bones to pick, or personal vendettas in mind:

Ironically, it’s often the critics of Godot who find themselves personally attacked for their critiques of the engine, much like the author of this book! The fanatical Godot community tends to ignore all facts and evidence presented to them:

All these rationalizations are typical in cults and have been studied for decades1. The most amusing thing to observe is that cult members of Godot, whether they are users or developers, will instantly respond with “there’s something wrong with you” and may even publicly label you as mentally ill if you go straight to the core of the issue with Godot’s governance.

People report unsavory experiences with Godot users, but instead of delving deeper, they choose to blame themselves, believing that the toxic behavior of the community has nothing to do with their leadership or the software:

Such conclusions arise when people who aren’t part of the Godot community mistakenly believe they’re the only ones facing negative experiences with it. Guilt-tripping often contributes to a reluctance to speak out fully in the Godot community. While dissatisfaction exists, many people withhold details of their negative experiences.

No one wants to repeat unfounded accusations against them, such as being labeled insane. Despite Code of Conduct violations, the leadership remains inert in addressing or curbing toxic behavior. It is therefore false to claim that the leadership bears no responsibility for the behavior of the community, when inaction may actually reinforce toxic behavior.

In the case of Godot, the blind fanaticism of its community negatively affects the quality of the software, because genuine criticism is often ignored during the development process, when even the lead developer himself uses a divisive “hater” label to discredit and suppress critics of Godot:

It must be very frustrating to be a Godot hater [emphasis added]. No evil company to blame, most stuff you like to complain about gets fixed after a while, so you need to go read social media to see what new trend to use for hating, etc.

Therefore, it becomes increasingly clear that these groupthink problems stem directly from Godot’s toxic leadership, as the fish rots from the head.

Pitchforks and Torches

One such example is a blog post of a Godot follower who publicly insinuated that someone who criticizes Godot has mental health problems2:

I wasn’t planing on writing about this guy for two main reasons: first, because I don’t think that there’s a lot to gain in talking about someone as ridiculously negative as this person appears to be (just who the hell hates game engines!?). And Second, because there’s a genuine possibility of him having some sort of mental health issue [emphasis added].

So, taking the second point into consideration, I’m going to do my best to avoid insulting this person or making assumptions about his personal character. I’m gonna stick to the reviews as much as possible, and focus on the hilariously ridiculous world he lives in.

The very small percentage of Godot followers who posses critical thinking abilities say that the above is not a healthy behavior3:

Comment
byu/JarLowrey from discussion
ingodot

I don’t agree with their idea of “high quality”, their taste in games, or all the criteria they apply to evaluate games, but I also think way too many comments here in this thread give me the foul taste of a raised torches and pitchforks towards an individual [emphasis added] because this individual called our engine bad things and does not share our taste or opinion what games should be made or what makes a good game.

If we know better, we should behave better imo.

Comment
byu/JarLowrey from discussion
ingodot

Personally I think what’s going on in those two threads with 500+ upvotes is a lot worse than what this guy is doing. That’s one individual. Here are hundreds of people rallying against a single person [emphasis added] (who also might have a mental health issue).

I read countless comments full of derogatory insults and instigation towards this individual. These threads turned into a mob. [emphasis added]

u/reduz, u/vnen, u/akien-mga, u/Calinou, u/punto-, u/TMM2K12, u/groud0

Is this not exactly what the code of conduct is meant to prevent?

As you can see, even when such a person begins to criticize their community, the commenter still accepts the possibility that the person they’re defending may have mental health issues. This is likely due to peer pressure; the answers above were heavily down-voted by others.

Not-so-personal Vendetta

The in-circle suppression of doubts is also prevalent within the Godot community. Take a closer look at a thread on Godot’s community forums, where fellow Godot followers ignored claims made by the author of the thread—a respected member of the Godot community who also happens to be the forum administrator4!

Before we delve further, it’s worth clarifying that words like “scam” or “grift” are labels that may partially describe certain aspects of Godot (see also explanation at Community-Driven chapter). Most people are aware of “scams” above all else in everyday life. So using the “scam” word may be a good way to attract necessary attention to the righteous cause of exposing the underlying, fundamental issue, which is a toxic cult of Godot. In fact, another author of the video associated with that forum thread came up with a definition of “psychological scam”5!

No matter how well-suited a definition may be, cult apologists will always frown upon such characterizations. What really matters, though, is not the specific labels used, although it is important to use the correct terminology. Ultimately, it all comes down to concrete evidence that can be discussed objectively.

Let’s take a look at how moderators reacted to the thread:

Operative words. Anything can appear as anything if you just look at it from the specific angle that leaves the 1 specific impression. Again, can’t blame anyone that falls into that trap, it’s human to do so and certainly not helped by Juan using the same account to try and get funding for both entities (which is now me projecting cause I’m assuming that he does so, but I’m not a twitter user and I don’t follow him).

It’s not just disrespectful to say such things in response to concrete facts that can be easily verified. It’s also a form of gaslighting. Another reply also denies facts and labels criticism as dogpiling, [emphasis mine].

I don’t understand this dogpiling. Especially done in public. So far, I haven’t seen anything shady or wrong being done, and there seem to be a lot of incorrect comments being thrown around, especially regarding the financial parts.

Denial and misrepresentation are common cult tactics. Another poster accused the author of practicing FUD. Ironically, FUD is also associated with cults, so what we are seeing here is a manifestation of projection by a member of a Godot cult. FUD is basically an attack on the author’s character, and is often used by fanboys to reject criticism, as in other cases, [emphasis mine]:

You’re wasting everyone’s time. You’ve shown no evidence of malfeasance. You’re just using this forum (which YOU pay for and control) to air baseless accusations and FUD. I’m out.

Other members appeal to emotion to discredit the author’s claims, and disregard the evidence as merely a personal opinion. Simultaneously, they acknowledge a possibility of the author being right, but then immediately say that this is irrelevant, which signifies a cognitive dissonance, [emphasis mine]:

I understand there’s a lot of anger. But someone being overly ambitious and underdelivering on expectations != Being a scammer or liar. That just means they over-promised on a deadline they couldn’t keep and need more time. And you not liking the direction of the technologies used or not used, that’s a personal opinion… you might be right, but that’s irrelevant. But instead of trying to convince the internet that they are the devil, why not be a bit more constructive? It’s open source, and people are free to implement their own solutions. Or just use something else and be diplomatic about it?

Contrary to what this Godot devotee says, the author did not paint the project leaders as devils, which is a strawman argument. Here are other instances of such behavior at Godot’s subreddit6, [emphasis mine]:

I don’t use Godotforums and now I know it’s managed by some deranged child, I have no interest in joining either.

It looks like he has a personal vendetta against Juan because of what he has chosen to prioritize for the project.

I knew that from the beginning, but it seems Cyberreality has a hidden agenda against Juan and the Godot Team.

The more I read about this the more delusional/unstable/mentally unwell cyberreality seems.

I cannot even imagine someone writing all that… Man needs help.

The above is just a subset of such toxic behavior. You may be shocked, but the following examples depict even more severe behavior: when the admin of the Godot forums apologized7 (but not before the cult leader of Godot, only to the community), the response to the apology was as follows. Look at the vast number of insults and not accepting apology:

People like this really need to fuck off. You’re not important and nobody cares.

Whatever, dude can go to hell. That’s no apology. That’s a fuck off and leave me alone statement.

Glad he is out. Pathetic and childish behaviour and didn’t even apologized properly. Godot is better without him

Pathetic is a perfect way to describe it. Felt like a twelve year old after being called out by their friends.

Idk whats going on here but this person sounds like a massive chode.

When people have a mental break with reality, they’re pretty incapable of apologizing for it.

Apologized, then spent a paragraph throwing the project under the bus.

“I’d like to apologize” is not an “I’m sorry for X, Y, Z” in my book.

Glad he’s stepping down. Guy needs some help.

What a twat.

What a weirdo.

And the ironic part:

Wow, it doesn’t sounds like an apology at all. He still belittles the engine and people who uses it.

A rare instance of Godot followers who possess critical thinking abilities rightfully responds:

Yeah the comments are really abysmal in this thread same most comments the other threads from the past few days. You also show the strength of a community by how the community is treating someone who leaves. What is happening here is really disappointing.

What could possibly explain the motivation behind such a pressured apology is the superficial “love” (see Love Bombing chapter) from the community that the admin likely received in the past. As previously said, humans naturally have a need to belong, and being part of an open-source community may temporarily grant that feeling. With Godot, the issue arises when it becomes overly strong, leading to an excessive attachment.

Therefore, it’s not wrong to generalize the Godot leadership’s undue influence to a larger group because, eventually, the fish rots from the head, see Cult Leader chapter. If you’ve been an attentive reader, you should have noticed that the admin of the Godot forums is the same one we introduced in Blue Robot Cult. Yeah, that’s quite a twist indeed! 😁

It’s important to recognize that attempting to be diplomatic with cult leaders and members of a cult can actually be detrimental to your own well-being. Unfortunately, the author felt pressured to apologize. However, the rule of thumb is to never apologize before a cult. By apologizing, you inadvertently validate their beliefs. Of course, the real challenge here is to be able to recognize the community being a cult. When they started a thread to notify others that the admin of the Godot forums apologized, they weren’t interested in an apology; they simply reveled in cult conformity.

Cults often have their own distorted worldview and ideology that they use to maintain control over their members. Apologizing can give the impression that you accept or acknowledge their worldview, further perpetuating their practices. Apologizing can reinforce these imbalances by positioning the leader or community as the ones who hold authority and righteousness. This dynamic can further disempower individuals, hinder critical thinking and independent decision-making. It can send a message that their behavior is acceptable or forgivable, contributing to a cycle of abuse and control. Apologizing will not protect you from further manipulation or ostracism. Instead, it could expose you to further exploitation or retribution from the cult leader or community.

What’s even more interesting is that, despite the vast number of evidence presented, some still choose to believe in Godot, and they literally say that success cannot be achieved without a lot of pain, and they hope that Juan, the great cult leader, will mature! 🙃

I still believe in Godot however, and I think things will turn out fine eventually. But not before a lot of pain.

…

I think the next couple of years will be Godot’s rockiest yet. But these years will also define Godot as a project, and hopefully Godot will mature. Hopefully, Juan will mature, if he wishes to stay at the helm.

This further reinforces the idea that Godot is a Trustocracy. In a community like Godot, you either bootlick and trust the leaders, or you don’t and you get kicked out. Intellectual discourse regarding Godot’s management end up lacking purpose and are seen as futile in the eyes of Godot followers. What the poster said is nothing more than wishful thinking. Just like with scams, when you are deep in a scam, you don’t want to feel scammed, you don’t want to admit that you got scammed, so you tend to get scammed further in the process of not admitting that you got scammed! 😁

Eventually, the forum has been taken over by new leadership controlled by a company, with Mike Lundahl at the helm. The thread started by the previous admin has now been deleted by the new owner8, who claims it was to create a more “positive” and “optimistic” atmosphere. 🤡

Due to such events, Godot’s toxic leadership will likely establish an even stronger mechanism to block all criticism regarding Godot’s hypocritical governance. Eventually, ownership is likely to be transferred to the cult leader of Godot, Juan Linietsky, or any other sub-leader, aiming for even tighter control over the community under their undue influence.

Undeserved Appreciation

The excessive promotion of Godot without acknowledging its significant issues is not helpful. These issues require attention, and having an influential position could raise awareness about them. However, Godot’s undue influence may also sway somewhat influential people into blind devotion. This is evident from what we could call “appreciation” posts as done by both Godot’s leadership and fans.9

It’s a lot easier to dismiss critics as “Godot haters” and paint a picture of a hardworking community than to actually tackle the real problems. This kind of social dynamic is demonstrated in the video below:

The comment section is filled with remarks that either attack the character or motivations of the video’s author, contributing to the growing evidence of a groupthink mentality surrounding Godot. Ignoring and justifying the bullying of former maintainers is not okay.

Conclusion

It would not surprise the author of this book if those who choose to expose Godot’s wrongdoings ended up apologizing. However, such an apology would not stem from the standpoint of autonomy of the will, but because of the undue influence exerted by the mob mentality that originates and is reinforced by the toxic leadership of Godot. Unfortunately, the fish rots from the head, and its community becomes responsible for adhering to the unethical practices of Godot’s toxic leadership.

People who critically express their opinions about Godot get labeled as “haters” by the Blue Robot Cult, and no apologies are going to be treated as sincere. Those who don’t share their ideology are labeled as biased, corrupt, mentally insane, or conspiring against them. Moreover, hate rallying against a single person isn’t seen as a violation of Godot’s Code of Conduct by Godot’s toxic leadership, because such an attitude is what describes cults: scapegoating and group narcissism. Such behavior is even endorsed by the toxic leadership.

My only advice to Godot followers who act like this would be: look in the mirror. Community and leadership of Godot get upset and angry when people:

  1. Don’t use Godot logo as a splash screen.
  2. Don’t “contribute back”.
  3. Talk about downsides of Godot or compare Godot to other Alternatives.

Is it really worth it?

Angry Godot

References

1

Cult Apologists | Cult Defenders - By Apologetics Index.

2

The Curator who Hates Godot - By Godot Notes.

4

Sadly, I think Godot is a Scam. I’m Not Sure I Can Do This - By Godot Community Forums Admin. Alternative archive: Archive.Today.

5

Is Godot A Scam? - YouTube.

7

Cybereality apologized - Godot subreddit.

9

Juan Linietsky’s post was made during a time when people were outraged about Godot not providing free consoles support, like other FOSS projects do. For more details on the issues with Godot’s console support, see Community-Driven chapter.