On Sat, 2003-10-25 at 01:51, Ian Clarke wrote: > I note that you have avoided virtually every crucial argument I made in > my response - I will try not to treat your reply with the same level of > evasiveness:
I note that the signal to noise ratio of this communication is quickly decreasing; my main argument, that you always put the background, is that core developer can obviously do all they think is good for Freenet, without the need to raise any consesus *BUT* they *MUST* take care of communicating *WELL* with other Freenet people what they do, if this has big consequences. Not a single word you wrote admitted that this time this was not done, and that this was a mistake (IMHO, of course). What is the purpose of [ANNOUNCE] maillist that most of software project (including Freenet) has ? Just to announce 0.x releases ? > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>When did I ever say that the Freenet community had zero value? > > You never said this, this is simply your attitude, since long time > > Citation. > > "Freenet is a research project, always has been. If people find that > > its usable, then great, they can help us research how to make it better. > > If you want something easy to use that works today and claims to protect > > your anonymity, I suggest you try Earth Station 5, its developers tell > > us that its just *great*!" > > > > The derision is unimportant. The attitude is. > > The attitude is simply your interpretation. Most people interpreted > this for what it was - namely that Freenet is still in-development, that > it is one of the most complex open source projects ever attempted, and > that those using a pre-1.0 version should give the hard-working > developers some latitude even when it results in temporary network > instability. > > In contrast - your attitude appears to be that the Freenet developers > are somehow acting contrary to the interests of the Freenet community > simply because you disagree with them on one issue. Presumably this is > on the basis of your massive contribution to the Freenet development > effort, no doubt consisting of much more than the hours of work most > core developers devote to Freenet on a daily basis. Ian, this is a core argument of several of your answer of some form of criticism you received in the maillist. The argument is "if you are not a core programmer, your contribution is not important". Well, this mean that using, administering several nodes, publicize gateways, write documentation, doig public speech, write articles, funding, administering dedicated maillist, are of no importance. I strongly disagree. But, being java illiterate, my argument are unimportant. But this is the better demonstration of you attitude to the rest of the Freenet people. > > This is just one recent example. Obviously you welcome people that does > > other than coding, and users that using Freenet allow testing > > and evolution are welcomed. Nodeops too. But they are not respected. > > Wrong - I greatly respect those that use Freenet, without them the > project would not exist. I do not respect those that complain while > offering no constructive criticism. Unlike most users, they don't help > Freenet, they hurt it. > > >>You flatter yourself when you claim to speak for the entire Freenet > >>community. Most of the Freenet community know the meaning of "unstable". > > I wonder where I wrote that; anyway I can only beg your and the other > > list subscribers pardon for being unable to master a foreign language. > > It is not a question of your mastery of English - your English is > infinitely better than my Italian, it is a question of your attitude. > > You said: > > "...in particular your position about the zero value of a Freenet > community that was already destroyed in the past without IMHO any real > need." > > You presume that I do not value the Freenet community simply because I > do not agree with your assessment of how the recent network fault should > have been advertised. I am sure that would be considered just as > ridiculous in Italy as it is in any other part of the world. No, there are several other past situation in which, IMHO, you acted as this was your opinion. Doing a list again will waste bandwidth and add a contribution to evade the main argument. I think that we are at the end of this thread, but, considering that his subject is non-technical, I'll put CHAT in cc:. If necessary, we can continue to discuss there. Ciao. Marco -- + il Progetto Freenet - segui il coniglio bianco + * the Freenet Project - follow the white rabbit * * Marco A. Calamari [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.marcoc.it * * PGP RSA: ED84 3839 6C4D 3FFE 389F 209E 3128 5698 * + DSS/DH: 8F3E 5BAE 906F B416 9242 1C10 8661 24A9 BFCE 822B +
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
