Cam wrote:They don't have to explain their choices to anyone and you're in no position to demand that they do. They have no obligation to you or anyone here. This is their choice to make and they've made their decision. A little respect shown towards their wishes now goes a long way...If there's a policy, let's see it, let the policy makers defend their choices. Neon John wrote:Then how about accepting it out of respect for the founders wishes? It is their decision to make, after all, not yours. Whether or not their choice is meaningful to you at all is a completely moot point.I could accept the name requirement if it had anything to do at all with the quality or usefulness of RockBox. It doesn't. From this side of the pond it looks like nothing more than some guys who've found themselves with a tiny bit of power wielding it poorly. >From this side of the pond your protestations sound like no more than sour grapes. ~ray |
- Re: Signing off. Neon John
- Re: Signing off. Tomas Salfischberger
- Re: Signing off. Neon John
- Re: Signing off. Andreas Stemmer
- Re: Signing off. Greg Haerr
- Re: Signing off. Tim Schmidt
- Re: Signing off. Neon John
- Re: Signing off. bk
- Re: Signing off. Matt Sicker
- Re: Signing off. Jonathan Gordon
- Re: Signing off. Ray Lambert
- Re: Signing off. Cam