On Sun, 12 Oct 2025, 11:20 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Ronald > > On Sat, Oct 11, 2025 at 05:05:44PM -0400, Ronald S. Bultje via > ffmpeg-devel wrote: > > Hi Michael, > > > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 11:01 AM Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The number of people voting was a bit disappointing but > > > > > > I can't speak for others, but I saw the vote request and didn't find it > > very serious. > > > > > What I mean with that is: in a regular vote, there's typically two (or > > sometimes more) opposing sides (e.g. parties, people, opinions) that both > > believe they are the best option in the set of available options. Each > side > > can argue for its own case and voters can make an informed choice after a > > fruitful and informative debate. (I know this is somewhat idealized.) > > > > You covered the "yes" side (something about collecting sponsorship money > > into SPI), but nobody made any counter-argument against "yes", e.g. for > the > > "no" side. Does this mean nobody supported "no" to begin with and it was > a > > strawman in a vote? Whose "side" was the "no" supposed to cover? Who was > > the proponent of the "no", or more generally: who was not on the "yes" > side > > and was the reason for the need-to-vote? > > i asked 3 weeks before the vote for comments > 0909 10:19 Michael Niederm (2.6K) [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Sponsors & Funding > and certainly people did take it serious. > > The alternative to my proposal was to leave things as they are, thats > the "default". Noone proposed another option, and that should not be an > issue because > people could have voted "no" and presented an alternative later. > > I would have preferred alot, if there where more votes > > But worse is, if we forever have everything stuck. (and i think you > actually > agree on that) > > and if you read your mail. > You seem not concerned about Funding > You seem not concerned about FFmpegs future > You seem not concerned about teh Team > You seem not concerned about competitors > You seem not concerned about FFmpeg developers we are loosing (because we > have no > way to pay them and they dont want or cant be volunteers forever) > > It seems you are concerned, that a decission was made, and not even one > you seem > to strongly disagree with, so I dont know. Iam a bit confused. > > Iam concerned about FFmpegs future if we cannot overcome these internal > issues. > > I think we should try to regularly chat with each other to better > understand > each other. I dont know exactly but what you say sounds like there are > some misunderstandings here. > Have a proper GA vote then. If you want to rant about why the GA is rigged or whatever, then why is your single vote in what is clearly a shambolic "vote" worth more than a proper GA vote? And now your usual approach of attacking people who disagree with you. (see SDR, STF etc) Kieran > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
