[14:30:27] * Starting query with rasengan [14:30:47] what exactly is going on with freenode? [14:35:50] Was this in relation to the post I made or something different? [14:36:40] If it’s about the post it’s just about what I explained in the message. [14:38:57] (But if there is something specific I’m more than happy to answer!) [14:41:54] who owns the freenode domain? [14:42:36] if that winds up being you, why should my projects trust you with ownership of it given the public messages you posted earlier? [14:43:30] one can ask the same question of tomaw, of course, so please don't take that personally :) [14:44:36] until today, i did not know or care who owns the domain. this incident forces me to have to think about this, because i have projects both large and small depending on freenode for their IRC needs. [14:45:19] if rash behavior could result in disruption of DNS service on the domain, it would negatively impact said projects. [14:46:05] ultimately, it comes down to a question of trust in whoever winds up owning the domain. [21:15:44] Absolutely. So let me try to clear that up for you, sorry I was away from the computer. [21:16:42] Freenode Limited owns the domain. The company has been in control for some time. Recently, a volunteer locked us out of the account. We attempted to get back in, and we received quite awful messages in response (extortionary). We attempted to then contact through a mediator to no avail since tomaw wasn't willing to stick to things. [21:18:30] I chose the rash behavior route as a final show of goodwill, believe it or not, in order to secure Freenode Limited again and make sure its safe and focused on its mission it's always been until now, because the only next available option will have consequence for tomaw and I certainly don't wish for it to go that far (e.g., legal). [21:19:49] As for the service itself, I don't think that I've been a poor custodian thus far and don't have any reason to believe that I will be in the future. FOSS is as important to me as it is everyone on this network, and I do think my actions thus far as it relates to my involvement have only reflected as much. [21:23:15] I could say a lot about the actions of tomaw and his team, if you really look at everything (e.g., "libera chat", and so forth), but I'll leave that to you to make your own opinion. [21:26:01] In terms of your projects - should you choose to continue to make freenode its choice of irc home, I can assure you that freenode will continue to strive to do everything it has always done. There won't be disruption. [22:44:00] in my opinion, it seems more appropriate that freenode be managed by a reputable organization such as software freedom conservancy or linux foundation [22:45:25] i can certainly get both you and tomaw in touch with folks at either organization to resolve this governance issue [22:47:49] Originally, that's what I suggested to tomaw as prawnsalad knows since we were trying to speak to him. Obviously, things didn't move in that direction and since we've been doing everything we can just to get access. Afterward, I have a proper governance structure that several in the space that I trust have reviewed it and felt it addresses things [22:47:49] properly. [22:47:55] running an IRC network clearly involves politics, but freenode has historically suffered from a vacuum of effective governance. perhaps more preconditions should have been required before handing the network over to christel but that was the choice which preserved the status quo. [22:50:09] can you elaborate on this proposed new governance structure? [22:50:19] Your interest and knowledge about the network and its space piques my interest. I'd love to hear more about the projects youre involved in and, also, later on explore if you're interested in volunteering! [22:50:36] i used to be a freenode staffer lol [22:50:47] really? [22:50:49] yes [22:50:52] i wrote the damn ircd [22:51:04] Ah! [22:51:08] don't you remember, you were on a dev net with me and nirvana (rdv) experimenting with IRCX [22:51:26] That's true! [22:53:30] as for volunteering, i do not think that is appropriate. i have several conflicts of interest. [22:55:21] what i would like is an outcome where freenode is stable and dependable. as somebody who i do recognize invested a lot of money into rebuilding IRC's infrastructure, i am sure you agree. [22:55:42] Ah, thanks for being forthcoming about that. If it's personal conflicts, I understand. If it's something like conflicts with another (irc) network, I don't imagine a policy exists nor would exist that will have anything against that at all so long as everyone is pro freenode and greater FOSS on freenode itself. [22:56:22] but i do not think a governance scenario where there is a benevolent dictator solves anything [22:56:35] That's what I'm trying to solve! ;) [22:56:50] you? tomaw? christel? lilo? it's always been this way [22:57:19] the reason why OFTC is more stable (and increasingly the network of choice for projects) is because it has a governance structure that people can actually believe in [22:57:29] It's all drafted out in a separate document dated April 8, but it basically describes a structure wherein each cohort of constituents with stakes within the existence and future of the network would be able to elect a representative. [22:57:37] freenode is as "traditional IRC" as the networks it has historically derided :) [23:02:12] (to be clear, yes this has been going on since before April 8). [23:02:29] Just to give a timeline in so far as the 'rash' action may not appear as rash when more context is provided. ;) [23:03:26] i mean in general. it seems to me that both sides are operating in ways that are not helpful to the network community itself. [23:06:16] i agree in spirit with you, but [23:06:36] i need to know more details about the proposed governance structure to say whether or not i could support it :p [23:06:45] actual documentation would help [23:07:50] I like you. ;) [23:08:11] That's very appropriate what you're saying and makes absolute sense, and if you agreed before further was presented/discussed/PUT IN ACTION, I'd think less. ;p [23:09:56] actual documentation will be presented to all at some point. There was a lot in the pipeline to be announced which all actually got paused cuz of this fiasco -_-; [23:10:08] i think freenode is a very flawed network. trying to fix it from the inside did not help, but i do think charybdis and the atheme workflow were valuable contributions to the topic of IRC network governanc [23:10:10] e [23:11:39] I have heard bits and pieces of the drama relating to all of this, I can't really make any opinion or comment as it relates to all that as I don't have any depth. That said, any decisions like that should involve the greater network as a whole and absolutely not be left to any 'benevalont dictator' or whatever you had called it earlier [23:12:11] I think one net you oughtt o checkout is DALnet. Very awesome governance structure [23:13:10] funny you mention DALnet, the design of charybdis and atheme, as well as the atheme workflow were worked on by myself and other ex-DALnet people including dalvenjah himself [23:13:50] we had a working network, StaticBox, where many of the freenode staffers (including tomaw) were trained in the atheme workflow [23:17:10] Interesting! [23:17:28] Is the atheme workflow documented anywhere? [23:17:48] in the charybdis operator manual :) [23:18:48] ah xD [23:45:07] anyway, if you have this governance doc that i can read, i can make some suggestions [23:45:25] i can't promise support. myself and tomaw go back a long way, in general, i do trust him. [23:45:49] but in the greater scheme of things, it is good governance that i want to see an that is what i will support [23:46:21] Sounds good, and hopefully once things are settled we can get that sorted as first priority. [23:53:32] okay [23:53:42] well, i have alpineconf to deal with this weekend anyway :)