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

271–280 of 307 posts

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

#271

Post by dapids »

rasengan wrote: post #142
tptacek wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's the further detail of Handshake, which Lee appears to be deeply involved in, which is a cryptocurrency that in essence claims the DNS roots as its own (part of the marketing strategy of Handshake appears to have been some sort of "airdrop" --- I'm not a cryptocurrency person and may be using that term wrong --- of coins to open source projects; I don't know if that's connected to the FOSS donations Lee keeps…

None of the donations Handshake made (136m) are being claimed as donations I made. The millions I have donated I did both personally and thru a wholly owned company. As I said before, attacking donations is sending a chilling effect in the FOSS community and to sponsors.

Oh I'm sure it's just rupturing the whole ecosystem! No it's not you pedantic fuck. Literally nobody cares if you donated, not one person.

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

#272

Post by dapids »

rasengan wrote: post #187
danieldle wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

freenode didn't use 1m in the whole 20 years it existed. Infrastructure: all sponsored Staffers: all volunteers Development: all FOSS Third party services like GitHub: all sponsored so what exactly would it have used > 1m on, please?

This is not true. As a single example, conferences cost money to throw - significant money. We did two. The FOSS community loves these events to be clear.

Literally nobody in the FOSS community cares about these events, wakeup.

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

#273

Post by epsylon »

IncRnd wrote: post #63

From Freenode's own website in 2017: "Following discussion and deliberation we have decided to formally (and legally) ally ourselves with PIA. Freenode will continue to operate as a not-for-profit entity under the same management, with the same principles, but PIA's involvement going forwards will provide us with opportunities and resources that we could previously only dream of. PIA will provide an operating budget,…

Classic Faustian bargain. Offer people money, obtain control in exchange.

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

#274

Post by dapids »

fastball wrote: post #87
rcxdude wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Maybe that's exactly the problem: Lee was being a custodian in the background. Tomaw or whomever decides they want control, so starts spreading falsehoods about interactions with Lee / Lee's intentions. Because Lee is so hands off, these falsehoods gain a lot of traction before Lee is aware of them / can do anything about them and now we're here. Not saying this is the reality, but it doesn't seem far-fetched given t…

Why are you acting like a mediator between two conversations you were never part of, it's like you are trying to play devils advocate. You aren't helping the discussion, if you know you know, if you don't you don't.

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

#275

Post by fastball »

kodah wrote: post #262
fastball wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the anonymous account?

That's his name on Freenode too. I don't think that's anonymous. He very clearly reads HN, as his "Freenode is FOSS" post links PGs fierce nerds post.

I'm talking about whomever ex-fnstaffer is. That's this person's name on Freenode?

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

#276

Post by fastball »

makomk wrote: post #152
fastball wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/h…

Great detective work, thanks.

This doesn't really help me understand what the hell is going on though. At this point I think I'm just gonna chalk it up to "IRC Drama" and call it a day.

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

#277

Post by [deleted] »

soneil wrote: post #203
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?

The best I can piece together so far: * freenode was run by elected volunteers. * Lee stepped in to sponsor/fund the Freenode Live events * Some assets were sold/transferred to Lee in the process of this * Former staff admin leaves, new staff admin is elected * New staff admin attempts to take control of assets they (reasonably) assume they should have control of * Lee (reasonably) perceives this as control of assets…

[deleted]

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

#278

Post by kuschku »

soneil wrote: post #203
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?

The best I can piece together so far: * freenode was run by elected volunteers. * Lee stepped in to sponsor/fund the Freenode Live events * Some assets were sold/transferred to Lee in the process of this * Former staff admin leaves, new staff admin is elected * New staff admin attempts to take control of assets they (reasonably) assume they should have control of * Lee (reasonably) perceives this as control of assets…

Here is a continuous quote (nothing omitted except the start/end of conversation) from a discussion between Andrew Lee and me from 2017:

[2017-08-03 11:48:56.616000] justJanne: I like the way you think about a lot of things and doubly appreciate the fact that you share these thoughts so that others can know and understand the realities of them as well. But, I do want to emphasize that while I am in fact listed on some piece of paper for a couple of IRC networks, I am not in control of any. That's not only a promise made, and my word means so much, but it's a reality: I don't have an O.

[Editor's note: O, or +O, means that the person is operator and has administrative control over the network]

[2017-08-03 11:48:56.789000] Whenever something comes up I don't get involved or don't even know. (ps: plz excuse my space bar i think there is something wrong wiht my driver)

[2017-08-03 11:49:37.530000] But the thing is IRC has alwasy been a glorious thing. The infra has always been sposnored by companies or people. But the great thing about IRC i s you can always vote and let the networks and world know which you choose - by using /server.

[Editor's note: /server is a command used to switch from one network to another]

[2017-08-04 21:48:37.553000] I'm fully confident though if PIA were to show any kind of negative intentions, people would /quit fast.

[Editor's note: /quit is a command to disconnect from a network]

His statements that he had no control and would never have it were believed by staff all those years, but due to experience interacting with him I never did and have warned against this very scenario ever since the sale (which prompted above interaction).

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

#279

Post by rasengan »

kuschku wrote: post #278
soneil wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best I can piece together so far: * freenode was run by elected volunteers. * Lee stepped in to sponsor/fund the Freenode Live events * Some assets were sold/transferred to Lee in the process of this * Former staff admin leaves, new staff admin is elected * New staff admin attempts to take control of assets they (reasonably) assume they should have control of * Lee (reasonably) perceives this as control of assets…

Here is a continuous quote (nothing omitted except the start/end of conversation) from a discussion between Andrew Lee and me from 2017: [2017-08-03 11:48:56.616000] justJanne: I like the way you think about a lot of things and doubly appreciate the fact that you share these thoughts so that others can know and understand the realities of them as well. But, I do want to emphasize that while I am in fact listed on som…

Not wishing to and having to step in are two different things. I wish I didn’t have to sit on irc. There are a million things I’d rather be doing and I could be doing.

But this is what must be done.

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

#280

Post by wowaname »

fastball wrote: post #254
ex-fnstaffer wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Why the anonymous account?

They value anonymity?
Post reply on HN