I'm just surprised you are so consistently inventing strange ways to
interpret what I say, even though I don't believe I am leaving any
ambiguity about my meanings or motives.

Let's unpack, point by specific point, just so that no one can accuse me of
simple insults or name-calling:

* "I'm just surprised that something as minor as attribution got you riled
up"

Why would that be surprising? Nothing I have ever said or done implies that
I don't care about attribution.

I'll allow "riled up", even though it's over already and the level was
never high. Now I'm "riled up" over, something and someone else. ;)
It's a vague enough term that it can apply to a casual comment or a death
threat.

* "- should have put your name(s) on the silkscreen."

Why do you suggest I do that? It's not my design and I never said it was,
and even further I did say whos it was. You can't arrive at this even by
implication or omission.

* "Your comment about side deal also struck me as a bit surprising"

What is so interesting? What strange nefarious thing did you think I was
saying? All I was doing was listing possible explainations for a thing just
to examine and eliminate them. What's so interesting about that?

* "- Oshpark is based on free sharing."

Yes. What bearing does this observation have on anything I've said? (ever
really, not just in this thread)

It's almost like you are trying to find any sort of excuse to have a
problem where there is none.
But, when this goes on for the next 64 posts over 4 days, it'll be my fault.

-- 
bkw



On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 7:34 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm just surprised that something as minor as attribution got you riled up
> - should have put your name(s) on the silkscreen. Your comment about side
> deal also struck me as a bit surprising - Oshpark is based on free sharing.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 2:03 AM Brian White <bw.al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It was public from the beginning. Jayeson made it after I asked on FB if
>> anyone could/would do so. I sent him the interface information and a
>> working original sample, and eventually a whole not-quite-working model 600
>> as a gift (shipping to AU was worth a lot more than the M600 even if it was
>> fully working), and after a couple revisions he emailed me gerbers as well
>> as created the
>> oshpark entry, I built a set and tested them in a working M600, alone and
>> combined with an original module in the same machine, and found no
>> problems, posted some pics of my completed units and gave Jayeson permision
>> to use them in his oshpark entry. I asked if someone wanted to design it
>> under some form of open source license right from the outset. Didn't have
>> to be public domain. I actually would have liked gpl or some version of
>> cc-with-attribution myself, but public domain is certainly "gpl or free-er".
>>
>> I already articulated the concern, and the lowness of it's level, as
>> clearly as I could. What part of "They are not violating any actual
>> laws, because this pcb design is explicitly placed in the public domain.
>> It's just that it would be at least minimally considerate to give a little
>> attribution where they got something from." failed at that?
>>
>> It ain't the end of the world, but does something have to be the end of
>> the world to talk about it?
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:11 PM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Never mind.  I see the fine print now.
>>>
>>> So..... it is now public.  What is the concern?   Someone is
>>> commercializing it.  Price is less than oshpark.  Sounds like a gòod thing.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, February 25, 2019, Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> How waa the design explicitly placed in the public domain?  Juat
>>>> curious.  De facto via oshpark?
>>>>
>>>> The 2nd one not mine.
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, February 25, 2019, Brian White <bw.al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Is this somebody here, or does anyone recogize or know them?
>>>>> http://ebay.com/itm/113662788499/
>>>>>
>>>>> They are not violating any actual laws, because this pcb design is
>>>>> explicitly placed in the public domain. It's just that it would be at 
>>>>> least
>>>>> minimally considerate to give a little attribution where they got 
>>>>> something
>>>>> from.
>>>>>
>>>>> They even (re)used the pictures right from the original oshpark
>>>>> listing:
>>>>> https://oshpark.com/shared_projects/8HMgno1x
>>>>>
>>>>> The designer (and oshpark account) is Jayeson Lee-Steere and the
>>>>> oshpark pics came from me.
>>>>> The ebay seller is not Jayeson nor does he know them, so it's not a
>>>>> deal he set up with the seller.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same seller:
>>>>> http://ebay.com/itm/113662802362/
>>>>> and the origin:
>>>>> https://oshpark.com/shared_projects/V0tpeuMg
>>>>>
>>>>> That one actually says copyright right on it. I believe this one is
>>>>> Steven Adolph right?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> bkw
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> bkw
>>
>

-- 
bkw

Reply via email to