fix: typo

content/blog/closed-openness.md

@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ The final act came months later. Despite moving on to discussions about what wou
 
 I document these events not to settle scores, but to correct an increasingly doctored record. People often encounter fragments of these discussions - carefully edited by now - and accept the painted narrative of me as some radical agitator. The irony is profound: [in this context](../nixos-policy-breakdown/#marginalization-is-contextual-and-temporal), I represent exactly the marginalized voice they claim to defend. I had no coalition, no special interest group, no funding - just my voice, my friends who've been similarly ostracized, and the occasional supporter willing to stand with me.
 
-This serves as a reminder that even a single person willing to resist tyranny can hold it at bay for quite some time. While I wasn't alone, I was perhaps one of the most persistent and tactical critic. My agenda was transparently simple: I wanted Nix to be the best it could be - the same motivation that now drives my work on Ekala.
+This serves as a reminder that even a single person willing to resist tyranny can hold it at bay for quite some time. While I wasn't alone, I was perhaps one of the most persistent and tactical critics. My agenda was transparently simple: I wanted Nix to be the best it could be - the same motivation that now drives my work on Ekala.
 
 But this isn't merely a personal grievance or isolated incident. The philosophical framework that enabled the NixOS takeover by politically entrenched radicals is, unfortunately, spreading. These events serve as a microcosm of a much more pressing concern. In 2024 alone, we witnessed similar patterns in the Linux kernel community, Python's governance debates, and numerous other high-profile projects. The timing and tactics are too similar to be coincidental.