Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

techrights.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 307 posts

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#71

Post by fastball »

SirSourdough wrote: post #59
nitrix wrote: post #30

People that aren’t in the wrong don’t need to save face like you’re desperately trying to do. All I can say is good luck running Freenode without its staff and sponsors.

I don’t have much of a dog in the Freenode fight, but the idea that people who are in the right don’t need to work to convince others is just patently false and not supported by reality. Especially when one side is seen as the side of “good” by default.

Yeah that is nonsense. Almost as bad as "people with nothing to hide don't need privacy" or "if you're innocent you should talk to the cops".

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#72

Post by erk__ »

dna_polymerase wrote: post #5

This is probably a pdf of this blog post: https://freenode.net/news/freenode-is-foss I'm not familiar with the situation, but find it odd, that the author signs off as "Chairman, freenode limited" where he seems to be the owner of the company that owns Private Internet Access (PIA) [0]. This form of selectively under-reporting has a weird smell to it. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26053770

PIA was sold to a Israli company some time back: https://www.hackread.com/private-internet-access-pia-vpn-sol...

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#73

Post by mmcgaha »

When we are not happy with a situation, it is easier to pack your shit and leave quietly than to make a stink about it. Many years ago, I was not happy with my bonus after an acquisition so instead of raising a stink I made my own bonus by leaving for a higher paying job. Do yourself a favor: always leave on good terms and be helpful when your old company calls with questions.

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#74

Post by esjeon »

Now this throws the ball to thomaw, who is, according to this pdf, “not capable with working with people in a suitable way”.

Also, while Andrew claims he supports decentralization, he also says he is “the owner” of freenode, which still smells really bad. It’s possible that Andrew himself also sent out bad signals to other staffs, which led to this drama.

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#75

Post by rcxdude »

rasengan wrote: post #18
AlexandrB wrote: post #6

As 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)…

Why do you think nearly the entire staff was against this? If it was a hostile takeover by a small 'non democratic' group, would you not expect that only that group would quit? Also, if you were the owner of freenode for so long, why does almost no-one in the chat logs which have been made public seem to be aware of you?

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#76

Post by scythe »

rasengan wrote: post #18
AlexandrB wrote: post #6

As 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)…

One thing which is unambiguous, both from your timeline and Thomas's: you were the first to contact a lawyer and send a gag order. He then responded with his own lawyer and his own gag order. And frankly, it doesn't seem at all reasonable that confidentiality would be necessary if the dispute is really just about a domain name account and a logo. Overall, it's hard to parse a coherent narrative from anything here, but a bare reading of the few unambiguous facts doesn't look good for you, from where I'm sitting.

I have no association with freenode or any major IRC channels, unless you count the GT Linux Users' Group (which is exactly what it sounds like).

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#77

Post by tinco »

nitrix wrote: post #30

People that aren’t in the wrong don’t need to save face like you’re desperately trying to do. All I can say is good luck running Freenode without its staff and sponsors.

> People that aren’t in the wrong don’t need to save face like you’re desperately trying to do.

That's a ridiculous statement, you should be ashamed of yourself.

> All I can say is good luck running Freenode without its staff and sponsors.

Do you actually have an allegation to make or are you just here to fan the flames?

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#78

Post by fastball »

blibble wrote: post #42

the only relevant information is what's in the contract that "sold" freenode to Lee which has conveniently been omitted without that this looks like gaslighting

Lee is claiming that this is due to some confidentiality agreement, which makes is more inconvenient than convenient.

Re: “Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

#80

Post by rasengan »

scrutinizer80 wrote: post #56
duckfang wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fine. We've already switched quite a few rooms to Libera.chat due to this debacle. More are moving as we speak. I don't know who's right or who's wrong. What I do know is that a LOT of volunteer IRC OPs left en masse for "reasons". I know a few of them, and am inclined to trust them. I'll talk with them after the dust settles. I know how to read the room, even though I don't have all the information. I helped…

The logs posted over at https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=18926720&cid=61404... Seem to indicate that the staff were unitedly and firmly against this. It's suspicious having the entire team against one person. I still don't get the whole picture but claims when made by an entire staff usually have merit.

It is ritual defamation [1]. This has been apparently going on for quite some time [2].

[1] http://techrights.org/2021/04/29/ritual-defamation/

[2] https://phanes.silogroup.org/vae-victis/

Post reply on HN