Ian and Florent have voiced concerns about whether my involvement in the poll could be influenced by the prospect of me benefiting financially by potentially being able to resume my job for Freenet.
I want to provide you with a solid proof that this is not the case, which is why I decided I am *NOT* available for hire for the year of a roadmap which this poll yields. I will instead finish the most important remaining WoT/Freetalk fixes for free, as a volunteer. In return I would be very thankful if our team's atmosphere could become less toxic in the future - not only towards me, but among *everyone* on the project. The bad climate between all of us *was* one of the reasons for me to quit my offer; and I'm not the only one who thinks we have a problem with our work climate, someone else even left as a volunteer because of it. It made me feel very bad that I was being accused of money being my motivation after I have already volunteered for *more* years than I was paid for, on the very same stuff I was voting for. Doesn't me writing WoT/FT code 6 years before money was involved show that I merely truly have been believing the stuff is what Freenet needs for a long time? But I acknowledge you were trying to protect the project and acting with good intent - just please remember that there are real human beings on the other end of the Internet who are just as passionate about the project as you are. Constantly putting a gun on their chest is unlikely to make them able to provide precision engineering. The stress is rather likely to make them act emotionally and thus show their worst qualities, not their best ones. I am of course aware that I also produced big rants which I should be and am ashamed of, and I will continue to try to not do that anymore! So anyway, you'll get another large bunch of code for free as compensation, which I hope provides enough proof so we can restart our relationship as a team - which would make me very happy! :) The sole reason why I am on this project is because I want to make the world a better place; and I trust you that's your intention as well. Thus there's no reason for us to argue, we're on the same side. Alright, so now that all hypothetical benefits in manipulating it are invalidated hopefully, here's my proposal on how to evaluate the poll results: https://git.io/v1ah4 Feedback is welcome! README: - The central output is the list of tasks sorted upon average votes divided by average cost estimate. This is in the file Main_Results.ods, on the sheet "RANKING". You should open this with LibreOffice - I haven't tried with Microsoft and the sheet is rather complex so there may be incompatibilities. The ZIP includes screenshots so you can check whether it renders correctly. - The foundation for the main output consists of the evaluations of the sub- stages: Stage3_Results.ods and Stage4_Results.ods. They're also included as subsheets of the Main_Results.ods. - At the stage 3 evaluation, I've excluded the votes of anonymous voters whose user identities have been created within a month of the poll's announcement. The project has existed for 16 years, so creating an anonymous user account within 1 month of the poll is very suspicious of being a sybil attack. It only takes solving a captcha to create a FMS identity, you don't need an email or anything, and you can create as many identities as you like to. Also someone on IRC *had* threatened to vote with sybils! - Stage 3 says that nextgens and toad_ have voted 1 point more than the 1000 available. This is likely a rounding error: The ballot template showed a default vote of 15 points, but that was actually 14.925 rounded to 15 in display (to make the defaults add up to 1000 votes without remainder). The voters having exported their votes to CSV likely replaced the non-rounded value with the rounded one. As I haven't exhausted all of my 1000 votes and they are important contributors, they can just have the 2 additional ones from me, no need to correct this :) - At stage 4, I've excluded estimates which were at least 800% off from the minimum or maximum estimate. I've chosen whether to exclude the min or max individually, e.g. depending on which side the majority of the other votes was on. I've notably also applied this to some of my *own* estimates, and to values whose exclusion *worsens* the average for my subprojects :) This stage was not about *choosing* what you like, it was about providing a scientific estimate of how long development will take. So if we exclude some estimates of people, we're not hurting their right to vote because this stage was *not* about voting; stage 3 was for that. - I've included nextgens' vote for fixing the installers (thats the one at the very bottom, written in italics) even though he failed to soon enough request the task to be added to the list of things the poll was about. People can still discuss to exclude his vote here if they think it's necessary, not my call. He sacrificed a big piece of his votes (291 of 1000), so he deserves his voice to be heard at least by including it in the sheets. And he wasn't the only one to request it, at least operhiem1 and ArneBab also did. I also acknowledge that the 32 bit era has been over for like a decade and thus there is no reason to require 32 bit VMs on Windows. Also, even without his vote, the winning first task of the poll *is* some other installer work anyway - so if we're already investing in someone to get familiar with the installer code, we might as well exploit that investment to the highest extent by having the Windows installer repaired too. - At the main resulting ranking there is a column for how many weeks of funding we will have left after each task. It assumes we have funding for 1 year - which is what we promised in our funding campaign what the money we requested would last for. At some point I've marked the remaining weeks with red color to indicate we've run out of money. I've started doing that at the point where we only spent half a year of funding even though we've got a full year in theory: Time estimates in software development are usually wrong so we should be careful. And at least to me, the estimates *do* look overly optimistic in many cases. Also only 5 people contributed time estimates, so there's probably not enough input for getting precise estimates. Further it was not yet disclosed how much the redesign for the website has cost, and the bank account balance isn't visible on our website anymore for some reason? Greetings, xor
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
