Hi Antoine,
> I can say missing an open-source engineering meeting or being revoked a few
> Github permissions matters far less than the clear affirmation and respect of
> the freedom of expression, the presumption of innocence and due process in
> the Bitcoin common space, all proportions conserved.
This is not acceptable. I will fight with you. Never feel alone.
/devfd0
floppy disk guy
Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.
------- Original Message -------
On Wednesday, May 10th, 2023 at 10:27 PM, Antoine Riard
<antoine.ri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Tony,
>
>> Is there a better place to havepubliccommunication? Unfortunately since one
>> off topic email was sent here, it's been a ghost town. It appears that
>> there's many emails being held and only one moderator that checks them once
>> a week.
>
> As I think you're referring to my post of March 21th and as the author of
> this post, I'll politely refuse the qualification of "off-topic". I had and I
> still have the concerns of "frivolous legal claims" being used between
> bitcoin developers/organizations provoking a distortion of the neutrality of
> the development and a chilling effect of the technical discussions (i.e code
> we compile and spec we implement). For those reasons, it was my legal right
> and moral duty to inform the community of what is happening between Chaincode
> and myself. And here I'm following the recommendation of one of the
> moderators of the Lightning mailing list himself "If this worries you too,
> let's make sure we keep each other honest, OK?" [0].
>
> When you think a group of people with open-source responsibilities are in a
> situation of conflict of interests or "moral hazards", or even the appearance
> of them, you have the right to expose the wrongdoing, including the
> _proportional_ revelation of private elements. People have done the "free
> choice" to conduct a career in open-source, for some even declaring in some
> context to maintain integrity and accept their actions to be submitted to
> external accountability [1]. While the exposure of private elements of public
> personalities might break common courtesy, it's a morally valid practice if
> you're familiar with the public institutions of US and Europe, and I think
> this practice has found validity in the history of open-source commons or
> IETF's protocol development [1].
>
> Beyond, the Bitcoin and Lightning development communication channels
> constitute a public forum, where by nature the participants are exchanging
> ideas and defending competing interests. In consequence, the participants'
> rights and capabilities to contribute and speak their minds in those
> communication channels should be protected. Those communication channels are
> not your usual corporate workplace, and in case of conflicting principles,
> the maintainers of those communication channels should ensure a balance of
> rights and a proportionality in any restraining measure.
>
> And this new post is not to exonerate myself of any legal responsibility for
> personal matters that could be recognized as the outcome of a judicial
> process, respective of both rights of the accusation and rights of the
> defense. Rather to enlighten the Bitcoin community that the formal separation
> between private matters and open-source responsibilities, and the adequate
> check-and-balances to guarantee this separation is somehow what are the
> underlying stakes for this feud between Chaincode and myself, from my
> perspective. I can say missing an open-source engineering meeting or being
> revoked a few Github permissions matters far less than the clear affirmation
> and respect of the freedom of expression, the presumption of innocence and
> due process in the Bitcoin common space, all proportions conserved.
>
> I don't blame any party involved in this issue, nor assign "bad intentions''.
> One position is really a function of your life experiences, knowledge of the
> legal and cultural framework and access to the factual elements. As all human
> conflicts it is not binary rather "grey". People can be top executives at a
> billion-dollar company, having successful ventures with hundreds of folks
> under management, or have a lot of responsibilities for their relative young
> age, and still disagree on the set of legal and moral principles to apply in
> the present case.
>
> Finally, thanks to the Bitcoin friends who have reached out to call for
> level-headedness and cool-mindness in the public discussion of this complex
> topic. Like I said to them, in the lack of more suspected wrongdoing from the
> other side, I won't communicate further on this subject on the Bitcoin and
> Lightning technical channels. However I still firmly believe the discussion
> on the principles, abstract in the maximum from its private elements, should
> still be pursued on other channels. Independently, there is a legal channel
> opened between Chaincode and myself and good progress is made to find a
> serene and long-standing resolution to this issue.
>
> Best,
> Antoine
>
> [0]
> https://rusty-lightning.medium.com/the-corrosion-of-ethics-in-cryptocurrencies-f7ba77e9dfc3
> [1]
> https://github.com/btrustteam/board-book/blob/main/vision/genesis_principles.md
> [2]
> https://www.ietf.org/about/administration/policies-procedures/conflict-interest/
>
> Le lun. 8 mai 2023 à 21:26, Tony Giorgio via Lightning-dev
> <lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> a écrit :
>
>> Is there a better place to have public communication? Unfortunately since
>> one off topic email was sent here, it's been a ghost town. It appears that
>> there's many emails being held and only one moderator that checks them once
>> a week.
>>
>> Would hate to see this list die but wondering if there's a better place for
>> discussions?
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> On Apr 29, 2023, 9:57 PM, niftynei < nifty...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> When I joined the lightning community a few years ago, I was relatively new
>>> to open source software and specification work. Rusty really impressed on
>>> me on the importance of holding conversations, as much as possible in
>>> public.
>>>
>>> Practically speaking, this encompasses IRC, this mailing list, and github
>>> issues/PRs.
>>>
>>> The reason for this is twofold. It helps document the range of options
>>> considered for technical decisions and it provides an interface point for
>>> new participants to contribute to the discussion.
>>>
>>> Given some recent mails that were posted to this list, now seems like a
>>> good time to reiterate the importance and preference of public
>>> communication whenever possible, especially for specification or technical
>>> discussions.
>>>
>>> ~ nifty
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lightning-dev mailing list
>>> Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
_______________________________________________
Lightning-dev mailing list
Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
