with all that i still don't know what freenode is lol
“Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
31–40 of 307 posts
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#32> In 2017, Christel, the former owner of freenode, asked me for assistance with funding and asked me to acquire it. I oblige. Was Christel ever the owner of Freenode? I thought Freenode was anarchically-organised.
It’s a mess. I’d gotten the impression that Freenode just recently been bought.
Are the staff leaving due to issue dating back four years, because the owner have been so hands off that nobody noticed before now?
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#33This has all the intrigue of a middle school slap fight. I cannot wait until all these folks get over themselves and stop screaming in public.
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#34As an outsider who hasn't used IRC or Freenode in over a decade, this situation is impenetrable. Neither the posts by the Freenode volunteers nor this post by Andrew paint a coherent narrative I can follow (maybe I'm just old). Best I can gather, the flashpoint that triggered this series of events is a dispute over the control of the freenode domain name and DNS servers?
Hi this is Andrew from the post and freenode. Long story short, former staff were upset about a logo but the logos were there since the start. I wanted to share that. Secondly, staff claim there was a hostile takeover. I have owned freenode for years and was a great custodian as far as I can tell (only compliments from former staff some of which even flew into defcon and came to my house on my dime, internationally)…
Hi Andrew, thanks for participating in the comments here.
Will you consider disclosing the terms under which you purchased freenode? PDFs of executed documents, ideally?
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#35As an outsider who hasn't used IRC or Freenode in over a decade, this situation is impenetrable. Neither the posts by the Freenode volunteers nor this post by Andrew paint a coherent narrative I can follow (maybe I'm just old). Best I can gather, the flashpoint that triggered this series of events is a dispute over the control of the freenode domain name and DNS servers?
It sounds like rasengan/Andrew Lee wanted a specific DNS change made which was objectionable to the staff, and that triggered the whole mess. I hadn’t seen it mentioned before but one of the chats from Thomas includes something about backing off from a DNS change.
I was cut off from the domains 2 days after tomaw asked me to give him ownership. So I was asking to revert a change not make a new one.
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#36Anyone still old enough to remember this [1] and this [2] ?
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2003/01/29/buy_a_piece_of_net/
[2] https://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=189470&cid=15603568
Back in the days :-)
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#37This just muddies the waters further.
Let's get concrete: What assets does Freenode have, and who legally owns them?
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#38> In 2017, Christel, the former owner of freenode, asked me for assistance with funding and asked me to acquire it. I oblige. Was Christel ever the owner of Freenode? I thought Freenode was anarchically-organised.
Christel was the head of staff and created a limited corporation in the UK to manage freenode’s name and trademarks. What’s unclear is how much “freenode limited” owns in terms of the network itself.
the formation of Christel's corporation did effectively make her* the owner. any court would see a service she is involved in operating by his company's trademark, as belonging to that company. sad.
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#39As an outsider who hasn't used IRC or Freenode in over a decade, this situation is impenetrable. Neither the posts by the Freenode volunteers nor this post by Andrew paint a coherent narrative I can follow (maybe I'm just old). Best I can gather, the flashpoint that triggered this series of events is a dispute over the control of the freenode domain name and DNS servers?
Hi this is Andrew from the post and freenode. Long story short, former staff were upset about a logo but the logos were there since the start. I wanted to share that. Secondly, staff claim there was a hostile takeover. I have owned freenode for years and was a great custodian as far as I can tell (only compliments from former staff some of which even flew into defcon and came to my house on my dime, internationally)…
Thanks Andrew, and very good that you prepared enough evidences to counter those issues raised by drama queens. All the free software is protected by copyrights, foundations, and so is the infrastructure. Somebody has to pay for it. Somebody does have assets, be it foundation or private individual or a group of individuals, but somebody is always considered owner of the assets and those assets have to be protected.
Thanks for doing the work, and I kind of feel it unfair and totally unjust to you as a protector and supporter of the IRC network. It is free because of people like you and others.
IMHO, all that drama was staged, planned.
The reason why such networks have to be held under legal entities is funding number one, as to keep networks financed by sponsors, and protection number two. Legal entities are formed under country's laws and in case of trouble it is legitimate to use laws to protect assets. You have not done nothing wrong in doing so.
Keep doing well!
Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the flashpoint was the nasty lawyerese received by the newly-instated head of staff (tomaw) after he had been elected. The story is impenetrable because, from what I gather, the lawyerese contained a gag order not to discuss the contents of the letter.
These letters were sent both ways. That’s why I was unable to speak until now.
Who sent them first, and why?