Live data from Hacker News

“Setting the record straight on Freenode” [pdf]

techrights.org

151–160 of 307 posts

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

#151

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?

I couldn't unravel it in a 10-minute skim, over lunch just now.

I speculate that one of the causes of this confusion (which is eerily familiar, from countless other disputes in community projects) is that people involved in community project disputes tend not enlist professional communicators to represent their perspective, and the disputes don't tend to be covered by investigative journalists. And outsiders just aren't interested to unravel it. Many individuals invest much of their lives into community projects, sometimes with little else left, and aren't prepared for suddenly being subject to the court of public opinion. And the public generally isn't invested enough in the matter, to work long to understand it.

Anyway, it sounds unfortunate that Freenode appears to be going through a rough time, and I hope good comes out of this period of its history.

FWIW, before Freenode started, lilo was on other networks, and I recall him asking how to create a nonprofit organization, which I assumed that was what became Freenode. I think the intent was to have a legal structure that would permit an IRC network to sustainably represent particular community interests.

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

#152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1) In early 2021, the freenode website was altered to begin prominently > mentioning Shells, a company that Andrew co-founded [4]. > > This was not discussed among staff at the time. This caused some > disruption and considerable confusion among staff for months afterward, > as to how to handle user inquiries about it, of which we received many. > > Ultimately, christel chose to resign rather than explain the situa…

Does anyone have a Wayback Machine link showing what exactly this looked like?

Ah, figured it out: it's at the top-right on https://web.archive.org/web/20210228045521/https://freenode.... covered by the Wayback Machine's own toolbar. This is the same location and the same level of prominence as the logo for Private Internet Access, their previous sponsor also associated with Andrew Lee, was placed in for about half a decade between around April 2016: https://web.archive.org/web/20160413123025/https://freenode.... and January 2021. It certainly wasn't just limited to https://freenode.net/acknowledgements so the claim that this is some shocking, unprecedented new practice that justifies the entire admin team quitting and encouraging everyone else to leave and sponsors to do stuff like delete their mail server without warning seems completely unfounded in actual evidence.

I guess everyone just decided to trust the Big Reputable Freenet Operators over that evil Andrew guy without bothering to check; though to be fair I only happened to notice because initially the other Private Internet Access link in the footer, which had no Shells equivalent, was the only one I could find and it turned out to go way back.

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

#153
post #122

Besides discussing what happened, I wonder what IS going to happen. Right now every staffer introduced by rasengan isn't known by much, seems to be very new to freenode (and even at some times, struggling with managing the services). Some of the new staffers seems to be previous operators of Rizon[1], also known as the 4chan of IRC, which is a dubious move. One of them also seems to have been fired from it[2]. On "Fr…

Probably would not be wise to guess or speculate and instead go by what I have actually said. The issue with services was because the previous team pulled our mail server and all its contents. We had to abruptly get everything in place. As for the decentralizing - that’s what I’m into and the way to do it on irc is by ending reliance on a central domain name for the connection. It’s not decided yet but is something I…

As an ex-freenode staffer, this is simply untrue.

You took over with zero transition plan, and no engagement with staff - none. You had had no involvement in the running of freenode until this week and had no relationship with any of the team.

You marched in, announced that you were saving freenode from the "hostile takeover" of their own consensus-based, transparent, self-organisation, and SURPRISE they decided that they didn't want to work with a mystery absentee landlord who rocked up, proclaimed themselves, and demanded their land back with a team of lawyers.

You have no track record on freenode, of working with the ex-staff team, and clearly don't understand the community.

Why else would volunteers who have been working on a project for ACTUAL DECADES FOR FREE ALL WALK OUT OVERNIGHT? This is not what people do with things they love unless something very odd is happening.

As far as I'm aware no-one damaged everything - and went to pains to leave in an orderly line. They just didn't want to work for you when you swooped in.

You even had the head of staff working with you to let you figure out how your new toys work. Any damage to data or infrastructure is, I think, the responsibility of the management.

Which if you are to be believed has been you for years anyway.

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

#154

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)…

> Long story short, former staff were upset about a logo but the logos were there since the start. I wanted to share that.

https://github.com/freenode/web-7.0/pull/489

"since the start."

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

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> someone named christel somehow sold you an IRC network 5 years ago, unbeknownst (until recently) to the people operating the IRC network on their own servers. This is false [1]. The PDF clarifies a great many of the unanswered questions and verified that despite former staff attempt to say I was lying, all I did was spoke the truth and helped when asked. Please review the PDF. Lastly, I also run servers on freenode…

I'm also not great at following this whole thing. When did you acquire Freenode or how?

The ownership chain of Freenode was

1. Rob Levin/Lilo, personally

2. Open Projects Network

3. ???

4. PDPC

5. Christel, personally

6. freenode ltd.

7. Andrew Lee (via freenode ltd)

After PDPC, what christel personally owned to transfer to freenode ltd to sell to Andrew Lee is... hard to define. A domain and a website, sure. But christel didn't own the servers, did not employ people, and does not have any agreement with the users, something which continued into freenode ltd. And apart from the users, operators, servers, and domain, it's not clear what an IRC network is to own.

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

#156
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then explain your motives more clearly. Freenode used to be managed by a college of trusted people, and now? The issues with services I speak about wasn't related at all to mail either.

Freenode was staffed by volunteers but it was never managed by them. They were recruited by management. Let’s not rewrite history any further, please.

This is also simply untrue.

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

#157
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you left out a few important things in that paragraph. There was at least one significant dispute. Something about a DNS change that would cause many people to leave. What exactly was that? Also, that Christel person or whatever their name, the fact that they apparently were kind of desperate for money at some point and so supposedly sold you something seems like you were taking advantage of them and the situ…

The DNS dispute is when I, who owned the domains, was cut off from the domains and simply asked for it back. As you can see I was approached by freenode to buy freenode please don’t twist it. Did you read the PDF with the screenshots?

> As you can see I was approached by freenode

You were approached by christel.

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

#158
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then explain your motives more clearly. Freenode used to be managed by a college of trusted people, and now? The issues with services I speak about wasn't related at all to mail either.

Freenode was staffed by volunteers but it was never managed by them. They were recruited by management. Let’s not rewrite history any further, please.

Who, exactly, is "management" here? And in what, exact specific, ways are they involved in freenode operations?

As I said in another comment, the core of freenode is its servers and operators, both of whom have no real ties to freenode limited as they consist of sponsored servers and volunteers, respectively. By that nature alone, freenode limited doesn't seem to have any influence over either aside from owning the name and trademarks.

So who exactly is "management" and what role do they have in the freenode network?

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

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

he didn't act improperly, you did by implying that he is a neutral party which as your employee/patreon: he isn't

He’s not my employee and I said he’s friends with both sides. I would say that makes him neutral.

That is not how neutrality works.

Due to history, and the possibility of being paid again in future, there may be what is called a potential conflict of interest.

But most important is perception. This is what's called a perceived conflict of interest, and it's the sort of thing you have to manage if you want a community based on trust to function well. Even if it seems silly, or like why can't we all just get along.

One way to manage them is to be up front about the relevant working history. Not doing so will be picked up as a sign that something relevant is being hidden deliberately to paint a different picture of interests, and therefore a different picture of likely future actions.

I found this article helpful:

https://www.ibac.vic.gov.au/publications-and-resources/ibac-...

And Wikipedia's intro:

> Typically, a conflict of interest arises when an individual finds himself or herself occupying two social roles simultaneously which generate opposing benefits or loyalties.

> The existence of such conflicts is an objective fact, not a state of mind, and does not in itself indicate any lapse or moral error. However, especially where a decision is being taken in a fiduciary context, it is important that the contending interests be clearly identified and the process for separating them is rigorously established.

(Fiduciary means in the broader sense of being responsible for something managed in trust for others' benefit, such as Freenode for example, not just financial responsibility.)

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

#160
post #122

Besides discussing what happened, I wonder what IS going to happen. Right now every staffer introduced by rasengan isn't known by much, seems to be very new to freenode (and even at some times, struggling with managing the services). Some of the new staffers seems to be previous operators of Rizon[1], also known as the 4chan of IRC, which is a dubious move. One of them also seems to have been fired from it[2]. On "Fr…

Probably would not be wise to guess or speculate and instead go by what I have actually said. The issue with services was because the previous team pulled our mail server and all its contents. We had to abruptly get everything in place. As for the decentralizing - that’s what I’m into and the way to do it on irc is by ending reliance on a central domain name for the connection. It’s not decided yet but is something I…

I see that you are spreading your falsehoods here, too.

The issue with services was not due to the "previous team", but rather due to the sponsor pulling their box. The "previous team" had no access to them by that point.

As you might have guessed, the sponsors had a gentlemen's agreement with previous staff and not with Freenode ltd. Now most of them obviously don't like sponsoring their boxes for your company, so they are pulling them.

Stop lying, Andrew. If you would have approached this in a sane and respectful manner and not sent your bloodhounds out, you maybe wouldn't have inherited smoke and ashes.

Post reply on HN