Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

Congratulations on your ability to Google information that has always been
public. I have little interest in talking to people who make false
accusations of impropriety. When you grow up you'll understand.

On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 6:01 AM  wrote:

> Hi,
> I respect your wishes, however misguided, to protect the anonymity of
> your fellow board members Scott Miller, Oskar Sandberg, and Adam
> Langley, and your undoubtedly distinguished secretary Steven Starr.
> However, they and you should know that as a nonprofit corporation
> registered in the United States, specifically Austin, Texas, their
> names are not private information.
>
> You are making decisions with respect not simply to a community of
> people who's only investment is time, but also to an actual, registered
> corporation, EIN 95-4864038.  You do not have the right to privacy in
> making these decisions.  You do not have the right to anonymity from
> those who contribute cash to you.  I am not qualified as a lawyer to
> state what disclosures or decision making powers you owe to those who
> fund you.
>
> I am, however, qualified to state that you do not get to hide in the
> dark.  Operating a corporation comes with some costs; among them,
> accountability.  Anyone can quite easily fine the EIN of The Freenet
> Project Inc, and from there use the IRS's handy free tool located
> here[1] to get to a nice data page with this information.
>
> [1]: https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
>
> I have uploaded a copy of the Freenet projects 2019 tax return to
> Freenet[2].  Not Freenet Classic; in fact because I used the most
> modern compression scheme in inserting it Freenet Classic will fail to
> load this file.  This is public domain information; you knew that when
> you submitted it, because it said in nice bold letters that it was
> "Open to public inspection" and that you should "not enter social
> security numbers on this form".
>
> [2]: CHK@GkFzsiuQV8QB6R9t7du3lsFPk9NJB0GyhDQzHwn9EFc
> ,pDW2x5PL6ett9a0mHLHvlqnhy73rEhQ4UVS8yU2yCmk,AAMC--8/954864038_201912_990EZ_2020101017366462.pdf
>
> You have the right to lie, and to obscure public information.  What you
> lack is the right for others not to release that information.  I find
> it very interesting that you claim to work 14 hours per week in service
> of Freenet, when it seems that nobody can attest to you doing any work
> at all.
>
> That's all.  Sorry for nerco'ing the thread, but I've been pretty busy
> for a while and thus wasn't aware of this occurring.
>
> Oh, and one more thing.  As a proud member of the next generation, at
> the noble young age of 19, I want to state, on the record, that I am
> strongly opposed to this change.  You're a Gen X'er.  Only one step
> above a boomer.  And yet you claim to know what will be good for a
> future that you have sabotaged?  Our world is burning, people are
> dying, and yet you seem to believe that because you started a project
> before I was even born you have the right to rename it and force others
> to do hours of work on your behalf?  At least go to the effort of
> updating your own Wikipedia page to clarify that, contrary to the
> understanding of every person under the sun, "freenet" refers to to a
> specific model of communication program but to a "mission statement".
>
> Statistically speaking, you will be dead before the 20-year horizon
> you're so concerned about will come to pass.  I'll still be here,
> trying to clean up the mess you created through your narcissism in
> beliveing that you have any rights over this project simply because you
> hold the corporate presidency.  Freenode is dead.  Don't kill Freenet
> too.
>
> Calum Morgan McConnell
> Electrical and Computer Engineering Student
> Lafayette College
>
> P.S.  I'd include my address here, too, since I am pointing the world
> to where yours can be found.  But I haven't founded any corporations,
> and I certainly haven't decided to skimp on paying for a PO Box rather
> than just include the address to my 3 bedroom family home on the tax
> returns.  So you'll just have to hunt that information down yourself.
>


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenet.org 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Russell Glenn]

Dear Ian Clarke,

You wrote:
> I'm not going to subject the other board members to the kind of
> infantile harassment I've been experiencing over the past two days,
> including anonymous cowards spamming the Locutus Matrix channel and
> then spamming individual members of the channel. Was that you?

I am very sorry that you had to experience unpleasant behavior.
I would please kindly request you to not project your anger onto me,
for I am not responsible for the actions of other people.

> There is nothing kind about the rest of your silly email. Grow up.

I am sorry that my mail did not sound kind!
I have revised the mail, it will follow below;
and would please kindly request you to reply to the revised version.

(1) Florent Daigniere, a long standing contributor, said:

> Bringing in "the board" in an argument of authority is an asshat
> move: As you know, none of its members have had any active
> involvement with the project nor its community for decades. In
> fact, looking at the list of subscribers to @devl, I highly doubt
> that any of them aside from you are on it; Prove me wrong, let
> them manifest themselves and defend what, so far, can only be
> seen as an unilateral move from you.

To which your only reply was:

> That's how non-profits work, their boards vote on important
> decisions.

This seems to indicate that the decision indeed was not made
by active members of the community.
And the board members did not manifest themselves, which
seems like another indicator.

Can you thus please tell us the names of the other board members?
Whether contact information for those names is available on
the internet is their own decision, so you will not expose them to
unsolicited contact.

(2) Your central argument in this thread seems to be that the
change is for the next generation of people.

Someone said you are born 1977.

By your own logic in this thread, where you multiple times informed
the others that you think they should not speak for people whom
they do not represent, you would not be allowed to represent
the next generation:
You are not a member of it, in fact you are multiple generations
behind if you are born 1977.

Thus, can you please tell us if it is true that you are born 1977,
or at least tell us the decade in which you were born if you
do not wish to disclose your age?

I send my kind regards,

Russell Glenn

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 2:44 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:

> I have assumed that Freenet acts according to these principles and that
> there are not just a few (or even one) people who make decisions about
> Freenet.
>

If you assumed that Freenet had a terrible decision-making process that
would lead to certain failure then you assumed incorrectly.


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenet.org 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Marek Küthe]

I think we just have different ideas about that. I don't see Freenet as
a product that you want or have to market.

As far as FLOSS projects and the like are concerned, I probably also
have a different concept for decision-making.

I have assumed that Freenet acts according to these principles and that
there are not just a few (or even one) people who make decisions about
Freenet.

Thanks for your answer anyway!

On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 14:35:48 -0600
Ian Clarke  wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 2:22 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:
> 
> > Well, I think here one should decide between a company / organization
> > with profit intentions and a community / FLOSS project and an
> > non-profit association.
> >  
> 
> I disagree. The same principle applies to any common endeavor by a group of
> people. Organizations that make every decision to try to keep the most
> people happy always stagnate and die, as night follows day.
> 
> You're proposing that a group of people with absolutely no competence in
> brand marketing make a complicated brand marketing decision. There is no
> universe in which that's a good idea.
> 
> -- 
> Ian Clarke
> Founder, The Freenet Project
> Email: i...@freenet.org 


-- 
Marek Küthe
m...@mk16.de
er/ihm he/him


pgpZOdFdf7Grj.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 2:22 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:

> Well, I think here one should decide between a company / organization
> with profit intentions and a community / FLOSS project and an
> non-profit association.
>

I disagree. The same principle applies to any common endeavor by a group of
people. Organizations that make every decision to try to keep the most
people happy always stagnate and die, as night follows day.

You're proposing that a group of people with absolutely no competence in
brand marketing make a complicated brand marketing decision. There is no
universe in which that's a good idea.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenet.org 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Marek Küthe]

Well, I think here one should decide between a company / organization
with profit intentions and a community / FLOSS project and an
non-profit association.

A company or organization can of course do this "dictatorially".

A FLOSS project is based on the developers, which in the best case are
based on the community. Here Arne, Operheim, Bombe and so on would be
the developers. They seem (in my perception) to share the same opinion
against the name change as the community.

An association, in turn, should be guided by the members and the board.

I would classify Freenet as a mixture of the last two with direction
FLOSS project.

For for-profit organizations, I agree with you. They should discuss
decisions with the board, but also have the flexibility to make
decisions quickly without anyone's approval. In my opinion, Freenet
does not fall into this category. 

On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 14:11:37 -0600
Ian Clarke  wrote:

> Organizations that put every decision to a vote stagnate and die, which is
> why no successful organization of any kind works that way.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 2:06 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:
> 
> > Nice to see that the email arrived at the Mailling list :-)
> >
> > I personally have never run a business. However, I know this procedure
> > from the community network dn42, for example. To get larger resources
> > there, you have to ask the Mailling list for permission, for example.
> >
> > Codeberg.org for example offers the possibility of a paid membership.
> > In this membership you can vote on decisions. (Codeberg has implemented
> > a great token system for this).
> >
> > On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 14:01:56 -0600
> > Ian Clarke  wrote:
> >  
> > > >
> > > > Only if the majority of the community agrees, this change should be
> > > > implemented  
> > >
> > >
> > > Have you ever actually run a company, organization, or significant  
> > project?  
> > > It really doesn't sound like it.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 1:59 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:
> > >  
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I am a Freenet user and also wanted to speak up.
> > > >
> > > > Since I have no position within Freenet, you can simply ignore
> > > > the email..
> > > >
> > > > Everything I say here is my personal opinion. I do not want to
> > > > personally insult, abuse or otherwise verbally hurt anyone. If anyone
> > > > feels personally attacked, I am sorry. I will use the first names of
> > > > the persons in the following, because I consider this as usual in the
> > > > internet. I do not mean to imply that I disrespect anyone.
> > > >
> > > > 1) Major changes in a concept or in a program (I count the name change
> > > > to it) should be discussed in the Commuity. There should be factual
> > > > arguments exchanged. Only if the majority of the community agrees, this
> > > > change should be implemented. This is something that makes community
> > > > projects. Even if you don't count Freenet as a community project, the
> > > > current developers should agree. As far as I have noticed, this is
> > > > currently not Ian, but rather Arne.
> > > >
> > > > 2) Transparency is part of a good FLOSS project. Not giving information
> > > > about donations or decision making process is wrong.
> > > >
> > > > The process like the decision has not been presented transparently. It
> > > > was only said that privately over a longer period of time, with Arne
> > > > was spoken, but without his consent to achieve.
> > > >
> > > > Of course, it always depends on the project, but I know it so that
> > > > always first the opinions of several people are obtained before a
> > > > decision is discussed. As far as I have noticed, only Ian and Arne were
> > > > involved, which have referred to mutual points of view. In my opinion
> > > > it would have made sense (and still does) to get the opinions of more
> > > > people and make a decision based on that. If you don't want to ask any
> > > > person from the community, you can take for example every person who
> > > > has committed to the project in the last years.
> > > >
> > > > 3) I think the real identity of people does not count. Even a
> > > > pseudonymous person can be a member of a community. Their votes should
> > > > be counted the same as those of non-anonymous members.
> > > >
> > > > 4)
> > > >
> > > > a) I don't know if it's just my subjective perception: I think Ian
> > > > contradicts himself in parts of his statements. On the one hand he
> > > > says that he likes to answer questions, but he doesn't always
> > > > answer factually.
> > > >
> > > > b) Here's my feeling: Ian announced it on the Mailling list. There
> > > > was strong resistance to it. First there was factual discussion,
> > > > but when the arguments ran out, there were personal attacks. This
> > > > to me is a sign of desperation.
> > > >
> > > > 5) I think a name change will greatly confuse future users:
> > > >
> > > > a) There are many documentations (some of them very old) 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

Organizations that put every decision to a vote stagnate and die, which is
why no successful organization of any kind works that way.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 2:06 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:

> Nice to see that the email arrived at the Mailling list :-)
>
> I personally have never run a business. However, I know this procedure
> from the community network dn42, for example. To get larger resources
> there, you have to ask the Mailling list for permission, for example.
>
> Codeberg.org for example offers the possibility of a paid membership.
> In this membership you can vote on decisions. (Codeberg has implemented
> a great token system for this).
>
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 14:01:56 -0600
> Ian Clarke  wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Only if the majority of the community agrees, this change should be
> > > implemented
> >
> >
> > Have you ever actually run a company, organization, or significant
> project?
> > It really doesn't sound like it.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 1:59 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I am a Freenet user and also wanted to speak up.
> > >
> > > Since I have no position within Freenet, you can simply ignore
> > > the email..
> > >
> > > Everything I say here is my personal opinion. I do not want to
> > > personally insult, abuse or otherwise verbally hurt anyone. If anyone
> > > feels personally attacked, I am sorry. I will use the first names of
> > > the persons in the following, because I consider this as usual in the
> > > internet. I do not mean to imply that I disrespect anyone.
> > >
> > > 1) Major changes in a concept or in a program (I count the name change
> > > to it) should be discussed in the Commuity. There should be factual
> > > arguments exchanged. Only if the majority of the community agrees, this
> > > change should be implemented. This is something that makes community
> > > projects. Even if you don't count Freenet as a community project, the
> > > current developers should agree. As far as I have noticed, this is
> > > currently not Ian, but rather Arne.
> > >
> > > 2) Transparency is part of a good FLOSS project. Not giving information
> > > about donations or decision making process is wrong.
> > >
> > > The process like the decision has not been presented transparently. It
> > > was only said that privately over a longer period of time, with Arne
> > > was spoken, but without his consent to achieve.
> > >
> > > Of course, it always depends on the project, but I know it so that
> > > always first the opinions of several people are obtained before a
> > > decision is discussed. As far as I have noticed, only Ian and Arne were
> > > involved, which have referred to mutual points of view. In my opinion
> > > it would have made sense (and still does) to get the opinions of more
> > > people and make a decision based on that. If you don't want to ask any
> > > person from the community, you can take for example every person who
> > > has committed to the project in the last years.
> > >
> > > 3) I think the real identity of people does not count. Even a
> > > pseudonymous person can be a member of a community. Their votes should
> > > be counted the same as those of non-anonymous members.
> > >
> > > 4)
> > >
> > > a) I don't know if it's just my subjective perception: I think Ian
> > > contradicts himself in parts of his statements. On the one hand he
> > > says that he likes to answer questions, but he doesn't always
> > > answer factually.
> > >
> > > b) Here's my feeling: Ian announced it on the Mailling list. There
> > > was strong resistance to it. First there was factual discussion,
> > > but when the arguments ran out, there were personal attacks. This
> > > to me is a sign of desperation.
> > >
> > > 5) I think a name change will greatly confuse future users:
> > >
> > > a) There are many documentations (some of them very old) which are
> > > not updated. If someone finds a documentation for Freenet and it is
> > > about Fred and not about Locutus, this can lead to confusion.
> > >
> > > b) If no one from the community or the developers agrees, how
> > > should something be implemented? As far as I can see, this would
> > > rather mean that there will be a fork of the Freenet project.
> > >
> > > 6) Is Freenet a mission or a software? Personally, I think it is
> > > software - as most people probably do. For example, Freenet is also
> > > described as software on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet and
> > > https://geti2p.net/en/comparison/freenet and not as a mission. If it
> is
> > > a mission, it would have made sense to clarify this early on and not
> > > wait until it is crucial. Even the website https://freenetproject.org/
> > > talks about a platform, therefore a kind of software, and not about a
> > > mission.
> > >
> > > Personally, I have always seen the mission as the background to why
> > > Freenet was developed.
> > >
> > > 7) I personally find the name Locutus very nice and would 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Marek Küthe]

Nice to see that the email arrived at the Mailling list :-)

I personally have never run a business. However, I know this procedure
from the community network dn42, for example. To get larger resources
there, you have to ask the Mailling list for permission, for example.

Codeberg.org for example offers the possibility of a paid membership.
In this membership you can vote on decisions. (Codeberg has implemented
a great token system for this).

On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 14:01:56 -0600
Ian Clarke  wrote:

> >
> > Only if the majority of the community agrees, this change should be
> > implemented  
> 
> 
> Have you ever actually run a company, organization, or significant project?
> It really doesn't sound like it.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 1:59 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am a Freenet user and also wanted to speak up.
> >
> > Since I have no position within Freenet, you can simply ignore
> > the email..
> >
> > Everything I say here is my personal opinion. I do not want to
> > personally insult, abuse or otherwise verbally hurt anyone. If anyone
> > feels personally attacked, I am sorry. I will use the first names of
> > the persons in the following, because I consider this as usual in the
> > internet. I do not mean to imply that I disrespect anyone.
> >
> > 1) Major changes in a concept or in a program (I count the name change
> > to it) should be discussed in the Commuity. There should be factual
> > arguments exchanged. Only if the majority of the community agrees, this
> > change should be implemented. This is something that makes community
> > projects. Even if you don't count Freenet as a community project, the
> > current developers should agree. As far as I have noticed, this is
> > currently not Ian, but rather Arne.
> >
> > 2) Transparency is part of a good FLOSS project. Not giving information
> > about donations or decision making process is wrong.
> >
> > The process like the decision has not been presented transparently. It
> > was only said that privately over a longer period of time, with Arne
> > was spoken, but without his consent to achieve.
> >
> > Of course, it always depends on the project, but I know it so that
> > always first the opinions of several people are obtained before a
> > decision is discussed. As far as I have noticed, only Ian and Arne were
> > involved, which have referred to mutual points of view. In my opinion
> > it would have made sense (and still does) to get the opinions of more
> > people and make a decision based on that. If you don't want to ask any
> > person from the community, you can take for example every person who
> > has committed to the project in the last years.
> >
> > 3) I think the real identity of people does not count. Even a
> > pseudonymous person can be a member of a community. Their votes should
> > be counted the same as those of non-anonymous members.
> >
> > 4)
> >
> > a) I don't know if it's just my subjective perception: I think Ian
> > contradicts himself in parts of his statements. On the one hand he
> > says that he likes to answer questions, but he doesn't always
> > answer factually.
> >
> > b) Here's my feeling: Ian announced it on the Mailling list. There
> > was strong resistance to it. First there was factual discussion,
> > but when the arguments ran out, there were personal attacks. This
> > to me is a sign of desperation.
> >
> > 5) I think a name change will greatly confuse future users:
> >
> > a) There are many documentations (some of them very old) which are
> > not updated. If someone finds a documentation for Freenet and it is
> > about Fred and not about Locutus, this can lead to confusion.
> >
> > b) If no one from the community or the developers agrees, how
> > should something be implemented? As far as I can see, this would
> > rather mean that there will be a fork of the Freenet project.
> >
> > 6) Is Freenet a mission or a software? Personally, I think it is
> > software - as most people probably do. For example, Freenet is also
> > described as software on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet and
> > https://geti2p.net/en/comparison/freenet and not as a mission. If it is
> > a mission, it would have made sense to clarify this early on and not
> > wait until it is crucial. Even the website https://freenetproject.org/
> > talks about a platform, therefore a kind of software, and not about a
> > mission.
> >
> > Personally, I have always seen the mission as the background to why
> > Freenet was developed.
> >
> > 7) I personally find the name Locutus very nice and would also be very
> > confused if it was suddenly called Freenet. Experience has shown that a
> > project is not evaluated by name, but by content.
> >
> > 8) One way to get clarity about the discussion now would be for example
> > to talk to the users one in IRC or alternatively to write to the
> > committers and ask what they think. I think based on their opinion a
> > judgement 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

>
> Only if the majority of the community agrees, this change should be
> implemented


Have you ever actually run a company, organization, or significant project?
It really doesn't sound like it.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 1:59 PM Marek Küthe  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I am a Freenet user and also wanted to speak up.
>
> Since I have no position within Freenet, you can simply ignore
> the email..
>
> Everything I say here is my personal opinion. I do not want to
> personally insult, abuse or otherwise verbally hurt anyone. If anyone
> feels personally attacked, I am sorry. I will use the first names of
> the persons in the following, because I consider this as usual in the
> internet. I do not mean to imply that I disrespect anyone.
>
> 1) Major changes in a concept or in a program (I count the name change
> to it) should be discussed in the Commuity. There should be factual
> arguments exchanged. Only if the majority of the community agrees, this
> change should be implemented. This is something that makes community
> projects. Even if you don't count Freenet as a community project, the
> current developers should agree. As far as I have noticed, this is
> currently not Ian, but rather Arne.
>
> 2) Transparency is part of a good FLOSS project. Not giving information
> about donations or decision making process is wrong.
>
> The process like the decision has not been presented transparently. It
> was only said that privately over a longer period of time, with Arne
> was spoken, but without his consent to achieve.
>
> Of course, it always depends on the project, but I know it so that
> always first the opinions of several people are obtained before a
> decision is discussed. As far as I have noticed, only Ian and Arne were
> involved, which have referred to mutual points of view. In my opinion
> it would have made sense (and still does) to get the opinions of more
> people and make a decision based on that. If you don't want to ask any
> person from the community, you can take for example every person who
> has committed to the project in the last years.
>
> 3) I think the real identity of people does not count. Even a
> pseudonymous person can be a member of a community. Their votes should
> be counted the same as those of non-anonymous members.
>
> 4)
>
> a) I don't know if it's just my subjective perception: I think Ian
> contradicts himself in parts of his statements. On the one hand he
> says that he likes to answer questions, but he doesn't always
> answer factually.
>
> b) Here's my feeling: Ian announced it on the Mailling list. There
> was strong resistance to it. First there was factual discussion,
> but when the arguments ran out, there were personal attacks. This
> to me is a sign of desperation.
>
> 5) I think a name change will greatly confuse future users:
>
> a) There are many documentations (some of them very old) which are
> not updated. If someone finds a documentation for Freenet and it is
> about Fred and not about Locutus, this can lead to confusion.
>
> b) If no one from the community or the developers agrees, how
> should something be implemented? As far as I can see, this would
> rather mean that there will be a fork of the Freenet project.
>
> 6) Is Freenet a mission or a software? Personally, I think it is
> software - as most people probably do. For example, Freenet is also
> described as software on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet and
> https://geti2p.net/en/comparison/freenet and not as a mission. If it is
> a mission, it would have made sense to clarify this early on and not
> wait until it is crucial. Even the website https://freenetproject.org/
> talks about a platform, therefore a kind of software, and not about a
> mission.
>
> Personally, I have always seen the mission as the background to why
> Freenet was developed.
>
> 7) I personally find the name Locutus very nice and would also be very
> confused if it was suddenly called Freenet. Experience has shown that a
> project is not evaluated by name, but by content.
>
> 8) One way to get clarity about the discussion now would be for example
> to talk to the users one in IRC or alternatively to write to the
> committers and ask what they think. I think based on their opinion a
> judgement should be made and not based on the opinion of a few people
> (or even one). Ian has mentioned many times that users do not speak on
> behalf of the community. While it is difficult to determine something
> like that, there are definitely some possibilities: One could contact
> the users of Freenet via Sone or IRC and get their opinion.
>
> Furthermore, I think that such a decision and thus the change will
> ultimately be implemented by the developers of the software. If the
> developers decide against it, there is a) the possibility to accept
> this or b) to make a fork. With a) you can clearly see at Freenet that
> the developers do not agree with it. b) could only make Ian. Then 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Marek Küthe]

Hello,

I am a Freenet user and also wanted to speak up.

Since I have no position within Freenet, you can simply ignore
the email..

Everything I say here is my personal opinion. I do not want to
personally insult, abuse or otherwise verbally hurt anyone. If anyone
feels personally attacked, I am sorry. I will use the first names of
the persons in the following, because I consider this as usual in the
internet. I do not mean to imply that I disrespect anyone.

1) Major changes in a concept or in a program (I count the name change
to it) should be discussed in the Commuity. There should be factual
arguments exchanged. Only if the majority of the community agrees, this
change should be implemented. This is something that makes community
projects. Even if you don't count Freenet as a community project, the
current developers should agree. As far as I have noticed, this is
currently not Ian, but rather Arne.

2) Transparency is part of a good FLOSS project. Not giving information
about donations or decision making process is wrong.

The process like the decision has not been presented transparently. It
was only said that privately over a longer period of time, with Arne
was spoken, but without his consent to achieve.

Of course, it always depends on the project, but I know it so that
always first the opinions of several people are obtained before a
decision is discussed. As far as I have noticed, only Ian and Arne were
involved, which have referred to mutual points of view. In my opinion
it would have made sense (and still does) to get the opinions of more
people and make a decision based on that. If you don't want to ask any
person from the community, you can take for example every person who
has committed to the project in the last years.

3) I think the real identity of people does not count. Even a
pseudonymous person can be a member of a community. Their votes should
be counted the same as those of non-anonymous members.

4)

a) I don't know if it's just my subjective perception: I think Ian
contradicts himself in parts of his statements. On the one hand he
says that he likes to answer questions, but he doesn't always
answer factually.

b) Here's my feeling: Ian announced it on the Mailling list. There
was strong resistance to it. First there was factual discussion,
but when the arguments ran out, there were personal attacks. This
to me is a sign of desperation.

5) I think a name change will greatly confuse future users:

a) There are many documentations (some of them very old) which are
not updated. If someone finds a documentation for Freenet and it is
about Fred and not about Locutus, this can lead to confusion.

b) If no one from the community or the developers agrees, how
should something be implemented? As far as I can see, this would
rather mean that there will be a fork of the Freenet project.

6) Is Freenet a mission or a software? Personally, I think it is
software - as most people probably do. For example, Freenet is also
described as software on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet and
https://geti2p.net/en/comparison/freenet and not as a mission. If it is
a mission, it would have made sense to clarify this early on and not
wait until it is crucial. Even the website https://freenetproject.org/
talks about a platform, therefore a kind of software, and not about a
mission.

Personally, I have always seen the mission as the background to why
Freenet was developed.

7) I personally find the name Locutus very nice and would also be very
confused if it was suddenly called Freenet. Experience has shown that a
project is not evaluated by name, but by content.

8) One way to get clarity about the discussion now would be for example
to talk to the users one in IRC or alternatively to write to the
committers and ask what they think. I think based on their opinion a
judgement should be made and not based on the opinion of a few people
(or even one). Ian has mentioned many times that users do not speak on
behalf of the community. While it is difficult to determine something
like that, there are definitely some possibilities: One could contact
the users of Freenet via Sone or IRC and get their opinion.

Furthermore, I think that such a decision and thus the change will
ultimately be implemented by the developers of the software. If the
developers decide against it, there is a) the possibility to accept
this or b) to make a fork. With a) you can clearly see at Freenet that
the developers do not agree with it. b) could only make Ian. Then there
would be a Freenet with the developers, which is up to date and a
one-time snapshot from Ian with the name "Freenet Classic". If anyone
here sees another possibility, I would be interested.

I would be happy if I am not called an "idiot", "child" or the like.

Greetings

-- 
Marek Küthe
m...@mk16.de
er/ihm he/him


pgpO0lOnWhv_V.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 12:40 PM  wrote:

> I think I have the right to know how the money is being used, especially
> since some of it was my donation.


I have no idea who you are or what you've donated, but nothing gives you
the right to ineptly try to bully me or anyone else with
impertinent demands for information or insinuating financial improprieties
in things you know absolutely nothing about.

I'm not your butler or your babysitter, and I don't respond well to
tantrums. I don't often block email addresses, but you're coming very
close. You've been warned.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[freenet]

I thought I was pretty clear who I am, would my legal name change how 
you have responded?


I think I have the right to know how the money is being used, especially 
since some of it was my donation. I would like to know the plan you want 
to impose on the software I run on my servers as a volunteer for your 
project.


I wonder how that is narcissistic seeing I didn't include my name.

I do find it funny, you call me/us (critics of your plan) children, 
while advocating for speaking out for the next generation and that this 
new plan of yours is better (the children seem to disagree).


You seem more and more like an angry dictator, when challenged shuts 
down and doubles down.
I guess any more comments or responses will be useless, at least it will 
be part of the public record.


Disrespectfully,

Ian Clarke:

Who are you, and what on earth makes you think you have the right to demand
any information from me?

I really can't believe you people, the narcissism is off-the-charts. Are
you all children? Seriously.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 12:02 PM  wrote:


Ian,

I have read over the last responses and there seems to be some items
that I would like clarification on, as well as some comments I would
like to add as a community member, node volunteer, and supporter of the
Freenet "fred" project.

DuckDuckGo donated $25,000 several years ago, that money has still not
been allocated or spent, will it be spend along with the $100,000 grant
given to Loculus? Where will that money go?

While the charity called The Freenet Project is your baby and passion,
it seems a bit unorthodox to do the following:

Have an 18 month private discussion with one dev, claim you disagree
with his objections and overrule them.
Go to the board, and claim this is happening, in secret, with no public
proof of any opposing views being debated or suggested (names can be
redacted and transcripts posted as Speaker #1) or at least minute notes
of these meetings.
Announce over a mailing list you have not posted to in months, let alone
to FMS or Sone, that this change is happening and it's happening now.
Limiting any other devs or community members to engage in discussion or
presenting valid alternatives. (like you state Arne doesn't speak for
everyone)
Demand code to be changed to update these changes, (I don't see a pull
request from you) and magically hope that all documentation including
unmaintained one will follow? (how do you expect abandoned freesites to
update their language?)

Please place yourself into the shoes of the community you were expected
to represent and lead, and realize maybe there was some mistakes made
here and more discussion should be done.

While the core of this issue is just a naming decision, and not your
leadership style or actions. There seems to be a 20 plus year common
understanding that Freenet is Fred, and Freenet Classic is Fred 0.5 when
the network forked.

Locutus is a new software project that meets very similar goals as your
charity organization. Maybe it would be best to create a new
organization to support the management and funding of Locutus, instead
of doing what feels to many as a "rugpull" from Freenet's community and
support.

I fear that even with your declaration, many users and devs will not
comply, and as Freenet is uncensorable, and development can continue
over itself. I wonder how you will deal with a rogue project (in your
eyes) stealing the name as it continues to operate against your wishes.

Respectfully,






OpenPGP_0x45E5F8C1504CDA42.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

Who are you, and what on earth makes you think you have the right to demand
any information from me?

I really can't believe you people, the narcissism is off-the-charts. Are
you all children? Seriously.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 12:02 PM  wrote:

> Ian,
>
> I have read over the last responses and there seems to be some items
> that I would like clarification on, as well as some comments I would
> like to add as a community member, node volunteer, and supporter of the
> Freenet "fred" project.
>
> DuckDuckGo donated $25,000 several years ago, that money has still not
> been allocated or spent, will it be spend along with the $100,000 grant
> given to Loculus? Where will that money go?
>
> While the charity called The Freenet Project is your baby and passion,
> it seems a bit unorthodox to do the following:
>
> Have an 18 month private discussion with one dev, claim you disagree
> with his objections and overrule them.
> Go to the board, and claim this is happening, in secret, with no public
> proof of any opposing views being debated or suggested (names can be
> redacted and transcripts posted as Speaker #1) or at least minute notes
> of these meetings.
> Announce over a mailing list you have not posted to in months, let alone
> to FMS or Sone, that this change is happening and it's happening now.
> Limiting any other devs or community members to engage in discussion or
> presenting valid alternatives. (like you state Arne doesn't speak for
> everyone)
> Demand code to be changed to update these changes, (I don't see a pull
> request from you) and magically hope that all documentation including
> unmaintained one will follow? (how do you expect abandoned freesites to
> update their language?)
>
> Please place yourself into the shoes of the community you were expected
> to represent and lead, and realize maybe there was some mistakes made
> here and more discussion should be done.
>
> While the core of this issue is just a naming decision, and not your
> leadership style or actions. There seems to be a 20 plus year common
> understanding that Freenet is Fred, and Freenet Classic is Fred 0.5 when
> the network forked.
>
> Locutus is a new software project that meets very similar goals as your
> charity organization. Maybe it would be best to create a new
> organization to support the management and funding of Locutus, instead
> of doing what feels to many as a "rugpull" from Freenet's community and
> support.
>
> I fear that even with your declaration, many users and devs will not
> comply, and as Freenet is uncensorable, and development can continue
> over itself. I wonder how you will deal with a rogue project (in your
> eyes) stealing the name as it continues to operate against your wishes.
>
> Respectfully,
>


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenet.org 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[freenet]

Ian,

I have read over the last responses and there seems to be some items 
that I would like clarification on, as well as some comments I would 
like to add as a community member, node volunteer, and supporter of the 
Freenet "fred" project.


DuckDuckGo donated $25,000 several years ago, that money has still not 
been allocated or spent, will it be spend along with the $100,000 grant 
given to Loculus? Where will that money go?


While the charity called The Freenet Project is your baby and passion, 
it seems a bit unorthodox to do the following:


Have an 18 month private discussion with one dev, claim you disagree 
with his objections and overrule them.
Go to the board, and claim this is happening, in secret, with no public 
proof of any opposing views being debated or suggested (names can be 
redacted and transcripts posted as Speaker #1) or at least minute notes 
of these meetings.
Announce over a mailing list you have not posted to in months, let alone 
to FMS or Sone, that this change is happening and it's happening now. 
Limiting any other devs or community members to engage in discussion or 
presenting valid alternatives. (like you state Arne doesn't speak for 
everyone)
Demand code to be changed to update these changes, (I don't see a pull 
request from you) and magically hope that all documentation including 
unmaintained one will follow? (how do you expect abandoned freesites to 
update their language?)


Please place yourself into the shoes of the community you were expected 
to represent and lead, and realize maybe there was some mistakes made 
here and more discussion should be done.


While the core of this issue is just a naming decision, and not your 
leadership style or actions. There seems to be a 20 plus year common 
understanding that Freenet is Fred, and Freenet Classic is Fred 0.5 when 
the network forked.


Locutus is a new software project that meets very similar goals as your 
charity organization. Maybe it would be best to create a new 
organization to support the management and funding of Locutus, instead 
of doing what feels to many as a "rugpull" from Freenet's community and 
support.


I fear that even with your declaration, many users and devs will not 
comply, and as Freenet is uncensorable, and development can continue 
over itself. I wonder how you will deal with a rogue project (in your 
eyes) stealing the name as it continues to operate against your wishes.


Respectfully,


OpenPGP_0x45E5F8C1504CDA42.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

Russell,

I'm not going to subject the other board members to the kind of infantile
harassment I've been experiencing over the past two days, including
anonymous cowards spamming the Locutus Matrix channel and then spamming
individual members of the channel. Was that you?

The non-profit will disclose such information in accordance with the law,
and not at the demand of children throwing a tantrum.

The decision was mine, the board concurred. There is nothing kind about the
rest of your silly email. Grow up.

Ian.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 9:55 AM Russell Glenn  wrote:

> Dear Ian Clarke,
>
> I would kindly ask you for some clarifications here.
>
> (1) Florent Daigniere, a long standing contributor, said:
>
> > Bringing in "the board" in an argument of authority is an asshat
> > move: As you know, none of its members have had any active
> > involvement with the project nor its community for decades. In
> > fact, looking at the list of subscribers to @devl, I highly doubt
> > that any of them aside from you are on it; Prove me wrong, let
> > them manifest themselves and defend what, so far, can only be
> > seen as an unilateral move from you.
>
> To which your only reply was:
>
> > That's how non-profits work, their boards vote on important
> > decisions.
>
> And the hypothetical board members did in fact not manifest
> themselves.
>
> This seems like an admission that you unilaterally made this
> decision.
> And an additional proof is provided by the fact that the
> board members did indeed not manifest themselves.
>
> Can you thus please:
>
> A) Tell us whether it is true that you were the only board member
> involved in the decision.
>
> B) Tell us the names of the other board members and their mail
> addresses.
>
>
> (2) Your central argument in this thread seems to be that the
> change is for the next generation of people.
>
> Someone said you are born 1977.
>
> By your own logic in this thread, where you copiously informed
> the others that you think they should not speak for people whom
> they do not represent, you would not be entitled to represent
> the next generation:
> You are not a member of it, in fact you are multiple generations
> behind if you are born 1977.
>
> Thus, can you please tell us if it is true that you are born 1977?
>
> I send my kind regards,
>
> Russell Glenn
>


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenet.org 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Russell Glenn]

Dear Ian Clarke,

I would kindly ask you for some clarifications here.

(1) Florent Daigniere, a long standing contributor, said:

> Bringing in "the board" in an argument of authority is an asshat
> move: As you know, none of its members have had any active
> involvement with the project nor its community for decades. In
> fact, looking at the list of subscribers to @devl, I highly doubt
> that any of them aside from you are on it; Prove me wrong, let
> them manifest themselves and defend what, so far, can only be
> seen as an unilateral move from you.

To which your only reply was:

> That's how non-profits work, their boards vote on important
> decisions.

And the hypothetical board members did in fact not manifest
themselves.

This seems like an admission that you unilaterally made this
decision.
And an additional proof is provided by the fact that the
board members did indeed not manifest themselves.

Can you thus please:

A) Tell us whether it is true that you were the only board member
involved in the decision.

B) Tell us the names of the other board members and their mail
addresses.



(2) Your central argument in this thread seems to be that the
change is for the next generation of people.

Someone said you are born 1977.

By your own logic in this thread, where you copiously informed
the others that you think they should not speak for people whom
they do not represent, you would not be entitled to represent
the next generation:
You are not a member of it, in fact you are multiple generations
behind if you are born 1977.

Thus, can you please tell us if it is true that you are born 1977?

I send my kind regards,

Russell Glenn

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Marco A. Calamari]

On gio, 2023-01-19 at 15:18 -0600, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 9:17 AM Juiceman  wrote:
> > > > Speaking of steal: 
> > > > 
> > > > https://trademarks.justia.com/874/39/freenet-87439977.html
> > > 
> > > Given that our use of the name predates their trademark by 18 years and
> > > has been in active use that entire time, I don't think this trademark is a
> > > concern.
> > 
> > My only concern was someone was trading on Freenet's name with a similar
> > area of technology.
> > 
> 
> 
> Ah, understood. My instinct is that it wouldn't be worth our time to do
> anything about it - but I'll give it some thought. Thanks for mentioning it.

Should worth the time. 

I had a case for "Freedombox";  a reinvention, and had some need to prove prior
use to have the other part drop it.

No need for legal, in my case.

FWIW.   Marco

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 9:17 AM Juiceman  wrote:

> Speaking of steal:
>>>
>> https://trademarks.justia.com/874/39/freenet-87439977.html
>>>
>>
>> Given that our use of the name predates their trademark by 18 years and
>> has been in active use that entire time, I don't think this trademark is a
>> concern.
>>
>
> My only concern was someone was trading on Freenet's name with a similar
> area of technology.
>

Ah, understood. My instinct is that it wouldn't be worth our time to do
anything about it - but I'll give it some thought. Thanks for mentioning it.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenet.org 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Juiceman]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 1:54 PM Ian Clarke  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:11 AM Juiceman  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 12:08 PM David Dernoncourt 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> As "just a regular user" and node runner who just poked around a few
>>> PRs, the main issues I have with this are 1) "what the Hell is Locutus" and
>>> 2) wow that's confusing.
>>>
>>> Sure, 1) is just (mostly) a rhetorical question. But it seems quite an
>>> unusual thing to "steal" the name of a software (even more so when said
>>> software is still actively maintained) to stamp it on another software that
>>> doesn't have any relationship with the other one beside being supported by
>>> the same foundation and sharing the same (or a similar enough) mission
>>> statement.
>>>
>>
>> Speaking of steal:
>>
> https://trademarks.justia.com/874/39/freenet-87439977.html
>>
>
> Given that our use of the name predates their trademark by 18 years and
> has been in active use that entire time, I don't think this trademark is a
> concern.
>

My only concern was someone was trading on Freenet's name with a similar
area of technology.


> --
> Ian Clarke
> Founder, The Freenet Project
> Email: i...@freenetproject.org
>

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 5:57 PM David Dernoncourt 
wrote:

> >> Maybe that's how you intended it originally, but with the possible
> exceptions of the devs who work on the depot named "fred" and maybe some
> users who are really experts and die-hard on wording accuracy, what most
> users call "Freenet" is that piece of software that you download from on
> this page https://freenetproject.org/pages/download.html that begins with
> "Download and install Freenet:"
> >
> > Firstly, you have no idea how most users of Fred feel about this
> > change, so I hope you're not implying that they all agree with you.
> > There is a lot of "argumentum ad populum" going on in this thread.
> > People should speak for themselves.
>
> Where did I mention agreement to the change in what you quote? All I'm
> saying is that the name "Freenet" is currently attached, in most people's
> minds, to the particular software and not to "the mission".
>

There you go again, speaking on behalf of people you don't speak for.


> I don't see how the naming in itself will be a game changer "for the next
> generation". "The next generation" will adopt any product it deems as
> "cool", even if it has a stupid name such as "TikTok" or "FTX". So as far
> as they're concerned, the name doesn't even matter. So yeah, you could
> rename as you say. You could also rename Locutus as Dicky-Doo-Dah. That's
> not really where the problem lies. Just like Freenet (current) didn't fail
> because of its name, Freenet (new) won't succeed thanks to of its name.
>

I'm not sure of your expertise, but I doubt it's in brand marketing.


> However, what about the current generation?


All 7.888 billion of them? You don't speak for them either.


> Is it gently (or not so gently) being told to sod off? I'd like to know,
> cause stopping a few servers here and there would mean fewer bills to pay.
>

If you think you can get your way by threatening to stop contributing then
you don't know who you're talking to.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenet.org 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[David Dernoncourt]

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023, at 00:13, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 4:47 PM David Dernoncourt  
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, at 19:32, Ian Clarke wrote:
>> > That's not what's happening. The name always belonged to the *mission*, 
>> > not to any particular piece of software. This is why we were careful 
>> > not to tie it to any particular codebase when we wrote it:
>> 
>> Maybe that's how you intended it originally, but with the possible 
>> exceptions of the devs who work on the depot named "fred" and maybe some 
>> users who are really experts and die-hard on wording accuracy, what most 
>> users call "Freenet" is that piece of software that you download from on 
>> this page https://freenetproject.org/pages/download.html that begins with 
>> "Download and install Freenet:"
>
> Firstly, you have no idea how most users of Fred feel about this 
> change, so I hope you're not implying that they all agree with you. 
> There is a lot of "argumentum ad populum" going on in this thread. 
> People should speak for themselves.

Where did I mention agreement to the change in what you quote? All I'm saying 
is that the name "Freenet" is currently attached, in most people's minds, to 
the particular software and not to "the mission".
And before you go back with a "you can't know what people think" argument: why 
the Hell would you assume a random user who downloads the only software offered 
on a page subtitled "download Freenet" (and named "FreenetInstaller.exe") would 
think "Freenet" isn't the name of the software they download and install? Until 
otherwise proven, they downloaded and ran a software, not a mission statement.

> But more importantly, let's pretend that every single Fred user 
> disagreed with changing "Freenet" to "Freenet Classic". As I've already 
> stated - the constituency I'm concerned with is the next generation.

I don't see how the naming in itself will be a game changer "for the next 
generation". "The next generation" will adopt any product it deems as "cool", 
even if it has a stupid name such as "TikTok" or "FTX". So as far as they're 
concerned, the name doesn't even matter. So yeah, you could rename as you say. 
You could also rename Locutus as Dicky-Doo-Dah. That's not really where the 
problem lies. Just like Freenet (current) didn't fail because of its name, 
Freenet (new) won't succeed thanks to of its name.
However, what about the current generation? Is it gently (or not so gently) 
being told to sod off? I'd like to know, cause stopping a few servers here and 
there would mean fewer bills to pay.

> So if you've got a compelling factual argument for why you think not 
> doing this will be better for the next generation, then I'm all ears.

As I said, for "the next generation", naming isn't important. You could even 
try naming Locutus "Big Brother", apparently people like that, and younger 
generations in particular. And considering your naming theory, maybe it's just 
because the name is catchy.

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

[resending, last one was sent from an old email address accidentally - I
need to leave and rejoin this ML].

Firstly, you have no idea how most users of Fred feel about this change, so
I hope you're not implying that they all agree with you. There is a lot of
"argumentum ad populum" going on in this thread. People should speak for
themselves.

But more importantly, let's pretend that every single Fred user disagreed
with changing "Freenet" to "Freenet Classic". As I've already stated - the
constituency I'm concerned with is the next generation.

So if you've got a compelling factual argument for why you think not doing
this will be better for the next generation, then I'm all ears.

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 4:47 PM David Dernoncourt 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, at 19:32, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM David Dernoncourt
> >  wrote:
> >> As "just a regular user" and node runner who just poked around a few
> PRs, the main issues I have with this are 1) "what the Hell is Locutus" and
> 2) wow that's confusing.
> >>
> >> Sure, 1) is just (mostly) a rhetorical question. But it seems quite an
> unusual thing to "steal" the name of a software (even more so when said
> software is still actively maintained) to stamp it on another software that
> doesn't have any relationship with the other one beside being supported by
> the same foundation and sharing the same (or a similar enough) mission
> statement.
> >
> > That's not what's happening. The name always belonged to the *mission*,
> > not to any particular piece of software. This is why we were careful
> > not to tie it to any particular codebase when we wrote it:
> >
>
> Maybe that's how you intended it originally, but with the possible
> exceptions of the devs who work on the depot named "fred" and maybe some
> users who are really experts and die-hard on wording accuracy, what most
> users call "Freenet" is that piece of software that you download from on
> this page https://freenetproject.org/pages/download.html that begins with
> "Download and install Freenet:"
>


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 4:47 PM David Dernoncourt 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, at 19:32, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > That's not what's happening. The name always belonged to the *mission*,
> > not to any particular piece of software. This is why we were careful
> > not to tie it to any particular codebase when we wrote it:
>
> Maybe that's how you intended it originally, but with the possible
> exceptions of the devs who work on the depot named "fred" and maybe some
> users who are really experts and die-hard on wording accuracy, what most
> users call "Freenet" is that piece of software that you download from on
> this page https://freenetproject.org/pages/download.html that begins with
> "Download and install Freenet:"
>

Firstly, you have no idea how most users of Fred feel about this change, so
I hope you're not implying that they all agree with you. There is a lot of
"argumentum ad populum" going on in this thread. People should speak for
themselves.

But more importantly, let's pretend that every single Fred user disagreed
with changing "Freenet" to "Freenet Classic". As I've already stated - the
constituency I'm concerned with is the next generation.

So if you've got a compelling factual argument for why you think not doing
this will be better for the next generation, then I'm all ears.

Ian.

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[David Dernoncourt]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, at 19:32, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM David Dernoncourt 
>  wrote:
>> As "just a regular user" and node runner who just poked around a few PRs, 
>> the main issues I have with this are 1) "what the Hell is Locutus" and 2) 
>> wow that's confusing.
>> 
>> Sure, 1) is just (mostly) a rhetorical question. But it seems quite an 
>> unusual thing to "steal" the name of a software (even more so when said 
>> software is still actively maintained) to stamp it on another software that 
>> doesn't have any relationship with the other one beside being supported by 
>> the same foundation and sharing the same (or a similar enough) mission 
>> statement.
>
> That's not what's happening. The name always belonged to the *mission*, 
> not to any particular piece of software. This is why we were careful 
> not to tie it to any particular codebase when we wrote it:
>

Maybe that's how you intended it originally, but with the possible exceptions 
of the devs who work on the depot named "fred" and maybe some users who are 
really experts and die-hard on wording accuracy, what most users call "Freenet" 
is that piece of software that you download from on this page 
https://freenetproject.org/pages/download.html that begins with "Download and 
install Freenet:"

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 2:12 PM Freenet304987 
wrote:

> Ian Clarke  wrote:
> > The name - which I came up with - never belonged to one codebase, it
> > belonged to the mission. This was the case from the beginning, which
> > is precisely why our mission statement didn't mention any specific
> > implementation.
>
> You are stuck in the past.
>
> Things you did 24 years ago do not grant you free reign forever.
> You've been absent for over a decade, Freenet has moved on.
>

Thank you, anonymous person I have no idea who you are, for telling me all
about the project I started.

Michael is right, this now seems to be more about you venting and having an
overinflated ego than advancing the interests of the project.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Freenet304987]

Michael Grube  wrote:
> You are a random, anonymous person with some unqualified sense of
> importance

I am unimportant. Where did I talk about myself?

I'm talking about the people who run this project who Ian is
ignoring.

Anonymously precisely because who I am is irrelevant.

> I'm not sure actually, what are you trying to accomplish?

Read my original mail:
https://www.mail-archive.com/devl@freenetproject.org/msg55278.html

> This conversation isn't really helpful anymore and should have
> ended about 20 emails ago.

Yes, with Ian Clarke saying "I'm sorry, I was wrong. Consider
my plans void."

> Veiled insults and being living because the word "Classic"
> is added to the title seems incredibly dramatic to me.

Classic implies Freenet is obsolete.
It will mean that anyone who randomly runs into the website
will consider Freenet "Classic" as outdated and
not the first thing to use.

It means that he effectively intends to end the project.
Which is a dramatic thing.

Re the insults:
It was tried for many years to be polite with Ian Clarke.
Unfortunately he has an extremely large ego which he uses to
believe he can just dictate how the project operates.
This ego needs to be trimmed by confronting him with the
reality of it.

> The regular users in this post who are not highly invested
> developers seem fairly neutral to me.

I cannot remember a single person saying the name change is a good
idea.

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Freenet304987]

Ian Clarke  wrote:
> Freenet304987  wrote:
> > But you absolutely do **not** have to steal the name of an existing
> > software for that.
> 
> The name - which I came up with - never belonged to one codebase, it
> belonged to the mission. This was the case from the beginning, which
> is precisely why our mission statement didn't mention any specific
> implementation.

You are stuck in the past.

Things you did 24 years ago do not grant you free reign forever.
You've been absent for over a decade, Freenet has moved on.

> > Millions of software projects were able to come up with a unique
> > and good name, so can you.
> 
> I did, 24 years ago.

Stuck in the past.

> Don't be silly, me not doing what you think I should do isn't
> "oppression".

Trying to push through a major change against a whole team of
people who have been working for free for you for decades.

If that is not oppression, then what is?

> > This is beyond ungrateful.
> > It is utterly vile and you should be ashamed.
> 
> I'm happy to hear different perspectives, but this melodramatic
> language helps nobody.

You arbitrarily decide you can effectively delete the work of
decades (by renaming it to something which sounds obsolete,
which means people will not use it).

Tell me: If a whole team getting treated like this after years of
donations is not melodramatic, then what is melodramatic?

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Michael Grube]

You are a random, anonymous person with some unqualified sense of
importance using personal attacks to accomplish I'm not sure actually,
what are you trying to accomplish?

This conversation isn't really helpful anymore and should have ended about
20 emails ago. Veiled insults and being living because the word "Classic"
is added to the title seems incredibly dramatic to me. What's the point of
continuing this ragefest? What is the goal? Guilt Ian into changing his
mind? You're doing a pretty bad job.

The regular users in this post who are not highly invested developers seem
fairly neutral to me. Screaming into the abyss changes nothing. Insults
change nothing. This thread has become ridiculous.


On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:49 AM Freenet304987 
wrote:

> Ian Clarke  wrote:
> > > You do not care about the currently existing, vibrant Freenet
> > > Community?
> >
> > I care about the maintainers and users of Fred, and I've said I
> > do
>
> If you care so much about the maintainers, then why are you ignoring
> the fact that they are **all** here, right now, telling you "no"?
>
> > this is why I've been discussing this with you for the last
> > 18 months to ensure that I gave your perspective a fair hearing,
> > even if I ultimately didn't agree with it.
>
> You discussed this in private with a single person.
>
> That is not a discussion with "the maintainerS" or the "userS",
> plural.
> Such a discussion would have been what is happening on the mailing
> list here right now.
>
> And as you can see, it would have resulted in a "no", because
> it does result in a "no" now, which you still not seem to accept.
>

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Freenet304987]

Ian Clarke  wrote:
> > You do not care about the currently existing, vibrant Freenet
> > Community?
> 
> I care about the maintainers and users of Fred, and I've said I
> do

If you care so much about the maintainers, then why are you ignoring
the fact that they are **all** here, right now, telling you "no"?

> this is why I've been discussing this with you for the last
> 18 months to ensure that I gave your perspective a fair hearing,
> even if I ultimately didn't agree with it.

You discussed this in private with a single person.

That is not a discussion with "the maintainerS" or the "userS",
plural.
Such a discussion would have been what is happening on the mailing
list here right now.

And as you can see, it would have resulted in a "no", because
it does result in a "no" now, which you still not seem to accept.

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Freenet304987]

Ian Clarke  wrote:
> > The core of it is the opinion of **EVERYONE** in this room,
> > Nobody wants your forced theft of the project's name,
> > not even a minority!
>
> What "room"? 

This mailing list.
Almost everyone who is important on the team is currently here.

They're all telling you "no".

How difficult is it to understand the concept of "no"?

> I've already said, the constituency I care about is the next
> generation. You don't speak for them.

You don't either. You're born 1977.

They can speak for themselves and join Locutus if they like to,
or Freenet, or none.

They don't need you to grandstand on their behalf.
They've shown their capability with Fridays For Future.

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:11 AM Juiceman  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 12:08 PM David Dernoncourt 
> wrote:
>
>> As "just a regular user" and node runner who just poked around a few PRs,
>> the main issues I have with this are 1) "what the Hell is Locutus" and 2)
>> wow that's confusing.
>>
>> Sure, 1) is just (mostly) a rhetorical question. But it seems quite an
>> unusual thing to "steal" the name of a software (even more so when said
>> software is still actively maintained) to stamp it on another software that
>> doesn't have any relationship with the other one beside being supported by
>> the same foundation and sharing the same (or a similar enough) mission
>> statement.
>>
>
> Speaking of steal:
>
https://trademarks.justia.com/874/39/freenet-87439977.html
>

Given that our use of the name predates their trademark by 18 years and has
been in active use that entire time, I don't think this trademark is a
concern.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Victor Denisov]

It's interesting how the word "I" is used persistently by Mr. Clarke, 
even though it was a (supposedly) group decision made by the board. If 
this decision was indeed made by a group of people, after debating and 
evaluating the pros, cons and consequences of same, I would've expected 
the word "we" being used more prominently.


For what's it worth, I personally hold very little interest in Freenet 
any more (after spending almost 8 years teaching students about it as 
part of my peer-to-peer systems curriculum, and running the node since 
0.3 days), mostly because in my personal opinion its goals (and the 
goals of Locutus, to that end) can no longer be achieved in the modern 
world of cheap and infinite on-demand computing. The window of 
opportunity for that had closed about 10 years ago. But seeing something 
which was dear and near to me being mismanaged in this way is still 
pretty... painful.


Regards,
Victor Denisov.

On 18.01.2023 19:11, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:


Ian Clarke  writes:


On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:40 AM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide  
wrote:

  Ian Clarke  writes:
  > What "room"? I've already said, the constituency I care about is the next 
generation. You don't speak for them.

  You do not care about the currently existing, vibrant Freenet Community?

I care about the maintainers and users of Fred, and I've said I do


This is the room that Freenet304987 is talking about.

Best wishes,
Arne

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM David Dernoncourt 
wrote:

> As "just a regular user" and node runner who just poked around a few PRs,
> the main issues I have with this are 1) "what the Hell is Locutus" and 2)
> wow that's confusing.
>
> Sure, 1) is just (mostly) a rhetorical question. But it seems quite an
> unusual thing to "steal" the name of a software (even more so when said
> software is still actively maintained) to stamp it on another software that
> doesn't have any relationship with the other one beside being supported by
> the same foundation and sharing the same (or a similar enough) mission
> statement.
>

That's not what's happening. The name always belonged to the *mission*, not
to any particular piece of software. This is why we were careful not to tie
it to any particular codebase when we wrote it:

*The specific purpose of this corporation is to assist in developing and
disseminating technological solutions to further the open and democratic
distribution of information over the Internet or its successor electronic
communication networks or organizations. It is also the purpose of this
organization to guarantee consenting individuals the free, unmediated, and
unimpeded reception and impartation of all intellectual, scientific,
literary, social, artistic, creative, human rights, and cultural
expressions, opinions and ideas without interference or limitation by or
service to state, private, or special interests. It is also the purpose of
this organization to educate the world community and be an advocate of
these purposes.*


> As far as suggestions go, even though (if it's not obvious) I don't
> support this change either (I would rather prefer, for instance, "Freenet
> Locutus" vs "Freenet Classic", dropping "Freenet [period]" instead of
> hijacking it), my suggestion would be to find a way to make it crystal
> clear that names were swapped and to point out clearly and concisely the
> key differences between the "old" Freenet and the "new" one.
>

My intention is that the websites will make this *very* clear, people
looking for Fred will find Fred, people looking for Locutus will find
Locutus. There is risk, as I said, but there is risk in every non-trivial
decision.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide]

Ian Clarke  writes:

> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:40 AM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide  
> wrote:
>
>  Ian Clarke  writes:
>  > What "room"? I've already said, the constituency I care about is the next 
> generation. You don't speak for them.
>
>  You do not care about the currently existing, vibrant Freenet Community?
>
> I care about the maintainers and users of Fred, and I've said I do

This is the room that Freenet304987 is talking about.

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:40 AM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide 
wrote:

>
> Ian Clarke  writes:
> > What "room"? I've already said, the constituency I care about is the
> next generation. You don't speak for them.
>
> You do not care about the currently existing, vibrant Freenet Community?
>

I care about the maintainers and users of Fred, and I've said I do - this
is why I've been discussing this with you for the last 18 months to ensure
that I gave your perspective a fair hearing, even if I ultimately didn't
agree with it.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide]

Ian Clarke  writes:
> What "room"? I've already said, the constituency I care about is the next 
> generation. You don't speak for them.

You do not care about the currently existing, vibrant Freenet Community?

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:05 AM Freenet304987 
wrote:

> Ian Clarke  wrote:
> > You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree.
>
> That's another grave misunderstanding:
> This is not "my" opinion.
>

Yes it is.


> The core of it is the opinion of **EVERYONE** in this room,
> Nobody wants your forced theft of the project's name,
> not even a minority!
>

What "room"? I've already said, the constituency I care about is the next
generation. You don't speak for them.


> You're acting like King Joffrey in GoT where he is completely
> isolated and proceeds to scream "I AM THE KING!!!"
>

Don't be silly.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 10:55 AM Freenet304987 
wrote:

> Ian Clarke  wrote:
> That's fine.
> But you absolutely do **not** have to steal the name of an existing
> software for that.
>

The name - which I came up with - never belonged to one codebase, it
belonged to the mission. This was the case from the beginning, which is
precisely why our mission statement didn't mention any specific
implementation.


> Millions of software projects were able to come up with a unique
> and good name, so can you.
>

I did, 24 years ago.


> You say you're against technology being a force of oppression.
> And you do that in the same thread where you're trying to oppress
> the people who have been running your software project for
> decades, for free.
>

Don't be silly, me not doing what you think I should do isn't "oppression".


> This is beyond ungrateful.
> It is utterly vile and you should be ashamed.
>

I'm happy to hear different perspectives, but this melodramatic language
helps nobody.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Juiceman]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 12:08 PM David Dernoncourt 
wrote:

> As "just a regular user" and node runner who just poked around a few PRs,
> the main issues I have with this are 1) "what the Hell is Locutus" and 2)
> wow that's confusing.
>
> Sure, 1) is just (mostly) a rhetorical question. But it seems quite an
> unusual thing to "steal" the name of a software (even more so when said
> software is still actively maintained) to stamp it on another software that
> doesn't have any relationship with the other one beside being supported by
> the same foundation and sharing the same (or a similar enough) mission
> statement.
>

Speaking of steal:
https://trademarks.justia.com/874/39/freenet-87439977.html

While I do understand the reasoning of "I can't come up with a better name
> to describe what we're doing", boy, how confusing is that. 20-something
> year old software suddenly becomes totally different. Imagine Mozilla
> rebranding "Thunderbird" as "Firefox" and "Firefox" as "Firefox Classic"
> (and on top of that you've never head of Thunderbird), what a mess this
> would be.
>
> As far as suggestions go, even though (if it's not obvious) I don't
> support this change either (I would rather prefer, for instance, "Freenet
> Locutus" vs "Freenet Classic", dropping "Freenet [period]" instead of
> hijacking it), my suggestion would be to find a way to make it crystal
> clear that names were swapped and to point out clearly and concisely the
> key differences between the "old" Freenet and the "new" one.
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023, at 15:04, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > Dear Freenet users and developers,
> >
> > I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to inform you of an
> > important change that the Freenet Project board voted on unanimously on
> > Friday. After much discussion over the past 18 months, we have decided
> > to rename the codebase and software known internally as "Fred," to
> > "Freenet Classic."
> >
> > In addition, we are announcing that the new codebase, known internally
> > as "Locutus," will be renamed to "Freenet." We understand that this is
> > a big change and it carries risk, but the board believes that this risk
> > is necessary in order to further the project's mission.
> >
> > It is important to note that this change does *not* mean that Locutus
> > is replacing Fred, which solves related but different problems. We will
> > ensure that where Fred is the appropriate tool for people they will be
> > directed to it.  Freenetproject.org will remain focused on Fred while
> > linking to Locutus - as it has been for over two decades - while
> > freenet.org will place more emphasis on Locutus, while still linking to
> > Fred.
> >
> > We will be implementing these changes over the coming days and weeks
> > and would be grateful for your ideas and suggestions on how best to do
> > this.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Ian
> >
> > --
> > Ian Clarke
> > Founder, The Freenet Project
> > Email: i...@freenetproject.org
>

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[David Dernoncourt]

As "just a regular user" and node runner who just poked around a few PRs, the 
main issues I have with this are 1) "what the Hell is Locutus" and 2) wow 
that's confusing.

Sure, 1) is just (mostly) a rhetorical question. But it seems quite an unusual 
thing to "steal" the name of a software (even more so when said software is 
still actively maintained) to stamp it on another software that doesn't have 
any relationship with the other one beside being supported by the same 
foundation and sharing the same (or a similar enough) mission statement.

While I do understand the reasoning of "I can't come up with a better name to 
describe what we're doing", boy, how confusing is that. 20-something year old 
software suddenly becomes totally different. Imagine Mozilla rebranding 
"Thunderbird" as "Firefox" and "Firefox" as "Firefox Classic" (and on top of 
that you've never head of Thunderbird), what a mess this would be.

As far as suggestions go, even though (if it's not obvious) I don't support 
this change either (I would rather prefer, for instance, "Freenet Locutus" vs 
"Freenet Classic", dropping "Freenet [period]" instead of hijacking it), my 
suggestion would be to find a way to make it crystal clear that names were 
swapped and to point out clearly and concisely the key differences between the 
"old" Freenet and the "new" one.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023, at 15:04, Ian Clarke wrote:
> Dear Freenet users and developers,
>
> I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to inform you of an 
> important change that the Freenet Project board voted on unanimously on 
> Friday. After much discussion over the past 18 months, we have decided 
> to rename the codebase and software known internally as "Fred," to 
> "Freenet Classic."
>
> In addition, we are announcing that the new codebase, known internally 
> as "Locutus," will be renamed to "Freenet." We understand that this is 
> a big change and it carries risk, but the board believes that this risk 
> is necessary in order to further the project's mission.
>
> It is important to note that this change does *not* mean that Locutus 
> is replacing Fred, which solves related but different problems. We will 
> ensure that where Fred is the appropriate tool for people they will be 
> directed to it.  Freenetproject.org will remain focused on Fred while 
> linking to Locutus - as it has been for over two decades - while 
> freenet.org will place more emphasis on Locutus, while still linking to 
> Fred.
>
> We will be implementing these changes over the coming days and weeks 
> and would be grateful for your ideas and suggestions on how best to do 
> this.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Ian
>
> -- 
> Ian Clarke
> Founder, The Freenet Project
> Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Freenet304987]

Ian Clarke  wrote:
> You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree.

That's another grave misunderstanding:
This is not "my" opinion.

The core of it is the opinion of **EVERYONE** in this room,
Nobody wants your forced theft of the project's name,
not even a minority!

And the rest of what I said is also very likely the opinion
of a great majority of everyone who has been taking care
of your project for free for decades.
I know that because I actually talk to them, unlike you.

Learn to read the room.

You're acting like King Joffrey in GoT where he is completely
isolated and proceeds to scream "I AM THE KING!!!", hoping
to get his authority back, even though he has zero.
Someone who has to scream he is the king is **not**.


Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Freenet304987]

Ian Clarke  wrote:
> The constituency I'm concerned with are the children growing up
> today facing a world where technology is a force of oppression
> and control, not a force for good. Business as usual hasn't
> addressed this and won't address it, that's why I'm doing
> something about it.

That's fine.
But you absolutely do **not** have to steal the name of an existing
software for that.

Millions of software projects were able to come up with a unique
and good name, so can you.

Hell, nowadays you could even have ChatGPT etc. generate one.
You studied CS "and artificial intelligence", use it.

Besides:
You say you're against technology being a force of oppression.
And you do that in the same thread where you're trying to oppress
the people who have been running your software project for
decades, for free.
This is beyond ungrateful.
It is utterly vile and you should be ashamed.

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide]

Ian Clarke  writes:

> I know exactly who he is, I was asking who he was speaking on behalf
> of since he was claiming to speak on behalf of the "Freenet
> community", quite a bold claim.

He did not claim that. It’s just how it seemed to you.

Yet despite not claiming it, Steve actually has the backing of the other
core developers and maintainers. And from what I’ve seen in the Freenet
community spaces, he also has the backing of the Freenet community.

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 9:40 AM Florent Daigniere <
florent-free...@daigniere.com> wrote:

> I'll help answer that one: He is a long-standing volunteer who is one of
> the current Release Managers; He has also been helping me with system
> administration for the project and still has access to most systems to
> this day.
>
> The fact that you are not aware of it just goes to show how disconnected
> you are from the community.
>

I know exactly who he is, I was asking who he was speaking on behalf of
since he was claiming to speak on behalf of the "Freenet community", quite
a bold claim.


> Bringing in "the board" in an argument of authority is an asshat move:
>

That's how non-profits work, their boards vote on important decisions.

Regardless of the outcome I can't help but think that this should have
> been handled better.
>

Perhaps, but pleasing everyone isn't and was never my job. The constituency
I'm concerned with are the children growing up today facing a world where
technology is a force of oppression and control, not a force for good.
Business as usual hasn't addressed this and won't address it, that's why
I'm doing something about it.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree.

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 9:33 AM Freenet304987 
wrote:

> Ian,
>
> for over 10 years, I have been a member of the Freenet community, too.
>
> You have some grave misunderstandings which I would like to clear up.
>
> They concern:
> - what you think you're entitled to do vs. what you actually are.
> - what you think your personal qualities are vs. the actual ones.
> - *especially* what you think the consequences of forcing this
> through will be vs. what they actually will be.
> - what Freenet needs.
>
> You seem to believe that by inventing Freenet, you own it and can do
> whatever you want with it forever.
>
> You discovered its math, which is great, but that does not make
> you the owner of the math, math has no owner.
>
> Instead, Freenet, like any other open source software, is a meritocracy.
>
> You have not contributed **any** useful merit for well over 10 years.
> You do not write code.
> You do not regularly communicate with the team.
> You do not even talk to the users on Freenet itself.
> And I am fairly confident you haven't even used Freenet in ages.
> Typically, you are only one thing: absent for years.
> Then all you do is burst into the "room" every once in a while, tell
> everyone that what they're doing is garbage, and boss them around.
>
> Hence you're **not** entitled to use the name Freenet like you want to.
> The people who have been writing the code for the past decades are.
>
>
> Which brings us to your qualities:
>
> Yes, by having a dominant, pushy character, you are good at acquiring
> funding.
> But unfortunately, this is also what is called narcissism.
> You are the absolutely stereotypical manager which annoys everyone
> who does the **actual** work.
> You are not just bad at helping a team of developers, but you're
> actually **so bad** that the only thing you do is interrupt them.
>
> Let's talk about the elephant in the room:
> Nobody on the core team likes you.
> None.
> They only don't say this because they're afraid of your outbursts.
> You're an obstacle to them, and have been for a long time.
>
> The only reason you haven't been banned yet is that migrating
> the infrastructure would have been detrimental to Freenet's users and
> a waste of time.
> But this only applies up to a certain level of misbehavior.
>
>
> So while you think you can just force the developers to do what you
> want, what will actually happen is this:
> They'll treat you as a malicious actor, an attacker, like any other
> open source project would do, and fork the project - under the
> **original** name.
> Because Freenet aims to prevent censorship.
> That includes censorship of Freenet itself.
>
> They will publicly discredit you, and you'll be known **not** as the
> great leader you think you are, but just another person who turned
> evil.
> Look at how everyone hates Elon Musk, that's you, just with less money.
>
>
> Finally, let's talk about what Freenet needs:
> Freenet needs not your vision, but to be left alone by you.
> While you have been rambling here, Arne has merged dozens and dozens
> of pull requests, some of which are the 70th (!) part of continous work.
> Yes, it is a 20 years old codebase.
> But it has people who understand it, and who work to resolve its issues.
> People who have been working on it for **decades**.
> You sully their great efforts with your belief that you'd somehow still
> "own" Freenet.
>
> The patience to merge the 70th part of a branch, **as a volunteer**
> is ridiculously valuable and **not** something you can provide.
> **Especially** not something you should tamper with and mess up.
>
> Once your fancy new project is at the point where Freenet is now, it
> will be in the same situation:
> Rust won't be the cool toy of the day anymore, and someone will urge
> to rewrite it. Yet another 20 years wasted.
> The rewrite-treadmill is futile and must be avoided.
>
>
> Please do everyone a favor and step down as leader and transfer
> leadership to Arne who does the actual work.
>
> Stick to acquiring money for Locutus.
> Have fun with Locutus, nobody asks you to stop.
> But do **NOT** abuse the merit and name of the Freenet community to
> advertise Locutus.
> You did not add to Freenet's merit in a long time, so it is not your
> property.
>
> Locutus must have its own name and its own infrastructure.
> Move it to its own domain and GitHub with a different name than
> "Freenet".
> You do not deserve to use the name Freenet.
>
>
> Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
>


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Florent Daigniere]

Hi Ian,

I'll help answer that one: He is a long-standing volunteer who is one of
the current Release Managers; He has also been helping me with system
administration for the project and still has access to most systems to
this day.

The fact that you are not aware of it just goes to show how disconnected
you are from the community.

Bringing in "the board" in an argument of authority is an asshat move:
As you know, none of its members have had any active involvement with
the project nor its community for decades. In fact, looking at the list
of subscribers to @devl, I highly doubt that any of them aside from you
are on it; Prove me wrong, let them manifest themselves and defend what,
so far, can only be seen as an unilateral move from you.

Over a year ago we had a conversation about your plans for Locutus and
you shared your difficulties with finding a new/better name. I have
suggested that you you take it to the community and ask them to suggest
something. I can see that you have also discarded my views and concerns
here as I haven't seen anything before your "Important Announcement".

Regardless of the outcome I can't help but think that this should have
been handled better.

For the record, I am also strongly against renaming fred, especially to
"Freenet Classic" which was the name given to 0.5 when 0.7 was released.

NextGen$

On Tue, 2023-01-17 at 15:54 -0600, Ian Clarke wrote:
> Steve,
> 
> You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community.
> Who specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability
> to speak for them?
> 
> Ian.
> 
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Steve Dougherty 
> wrote:
> > Hi Ian,
> > 
> > I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and
> > the
> > rest of the board expected.
> > 
> > This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the
> > board
> > of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial
> > plans
> > to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the
> > rest of
> > the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand
> > recognition.
> > The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
> > consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the
> > effort
> > to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.
> > 
> > I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
> > none.
> > 
> > - Steve
> 
> 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Freenet304987]

Ian,

for over 10 years, I have been a member of the Freenet community, too.

You have some grave misunderstandings which I would like to clear up.

They concern:
- what you think you're entitled to do vs. what you actually are.
- what you think your personal qualities are vs. the actual ones.
- *especially* what you think the consequences of forcing this
through will be vs. what they actually will be.
- what Freenet needs.

You seem to believe that by inventing Freenet, you own it and can do
whatever you want with it forever.

You discovered its math, which is great, but that does not make
you the owner of the math, math has no owner.

Instead, Freenet, like any other open source software, is a meritocracy.

You have not contributed **any** useful merit for well over 10 years.
You do not write code.
You do not regularly communicate with the team.
You do not even talk to the users on Freenet itself.
And I am fairly confident you haven't even used Freenet in ages.
Typically, you are only one thing: absent for years.
Then all you do is burst into the "room" every once in a while, tell
everyone that what they're doing is garbage, and boss them around.

Hence you're **not** entitled to use the name Freenet like you want to.
The people who have been writing the code for the past decades are.


Which brings us to your qualities:

Yes, by having a dominant, pushy character, you are good at acquiring
funding.
But unfortunately, this is also what is called narcissism.
You are the absolutely stereotypical manager which annoys everyone
who does the **actual** work.
You are not just bad at helping a team of developers, but you're
actually **so bad** that the only thing you do is interrupt them.

Let's talk about the elephant in the room:
Nobody on the core team likes you.
None.
They only don't say this because they're afraid of your outbursts.
You're an obstacle to them, and have been for a long time.

The only reason you haven't been banned yet is that migrating
the infrastructure would have been detrimental to Freenet's users and
a waste of time.
But this only applies up to a certain level of misbehavior.


So while you think you can just force the developers to do what you
want, what will actually happen is this:
They'll treat you as a malicious actor, an attacker, like any other
open source project would do, and fork the project - under the
**original** name.
Because Freenet aims to prevent censorship.
That includes censorship of Freenet itself.

They will publicly discredit you, and you'll be known **not** as the
great leader you think you are, but just another person who turned
evil.
Look at how everyone hates Elon Musk, that's you, just with less money.


Finally, let's talk about what Freenet needs:
Freenet needs not your vision, but to be left alone by you.
While you have been rambling here, Arne has merged dozens and dozens
of pull requests, some of which are the 70th (!) part of continous work.
Yes, it is a 20 years old codebase.
But it has people who understand it, and who work to resolve its issues.
People who have been working on it for **decades**.
You sully their great efforts with your belief that you'd somehow still
"own" Freenet.

The patience to merge the 70th part of a branch, **as a volunteer**
is ridiculously valuable and **not** something you can provide.
**Especially** not something you should tamper with and mess up.

Once your fancy new project is at the point where Freenet is now, it
will be in the same situation:
Rust won't be the cool toy of the day anymore, and someone will urge
to rewrite it. Yet another 20 years wasted.
The rewrite-treadmill is futile and must be avoided.


Please do everyone a favor and step down as leader and transfer
leadership to Arne who does the actual work.

Stick to acquiring money for Locutus.
Have fun with Locutus, nobody asks you to stop.
But do **NOT** abuse the merit and name of the Freenet community to
advertise Locutus.
You did not add to Freenet's merit in a long time, so it is not your
property.

Locutus must have its own name and its own infrastructure.
Move it to its own domain and GitHub with a different name than
"Freenet".
You do not deserve to use the name Freenet.


Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 4:53 AM Marco A. Calamari 
wrote:

Hi Marco, I hope you are well.

But in fact, I too do not understand the total silence on this subject on
> all Freenet lists, including announce, before you mail.
>

As I said, I have been discussing this with Arne for 18 months to ensure I
understood the perspective of those likely to oppose it. Making this a
public debate would have created far more heat than light because branding
is an inherently subjective issue. If it were an architectural question a
different approach would be appropriate.


> IMHO it will be useful, and more polite too, to send some post here with
> link to your video and public Locutus documents.
>

All relevant information on Locutus is available at https://freenet.org/ -
I'm surprised that this hasn't been more widely discussed among Fred users,
none of it has been a secret. I've done interviews about it on popular
YouTube channels.


> P.S. any trip to Italy in the near future?
>

None planned but I'd love to get back there someday, nice to hear from you
Marco.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 11:49 PM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide 
wrote:

>
> Ian Clarke  writes:
> > Apologies to mutt users, but Freenet's mainstream brand recognition has
> been on an uninterrupted
> > downward trajectory since 2004:
> >
> > freenet-trend.png
>
> You are showing the US-trend. Let’s look at the trend in a country where
> there was PR done:
>

I'm glad to see it, people searching for Freenet will arrive at either
freenetproject.org or freenet.org - which will direct them to
freenetproject.org if they are looking for Fred.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Marco A. Calamari]

Hi Ian, how are you?

Being a lurker of Freenet in the last 10 years, after my initial involvement,  I
have no moral right to discuss the subject.

But in fact, I too do not understand the total silence on this subject on all
Freenet lists, including announce, before you mail.

IMHO it will be useful, and more polite too, to send some post here with link to
your video and public Locutus documents. 

I write this, of course, without taking any personal position on this subject. 

I know branding is very important in general, but is the evil himself in my
personal philosophy.

I'll start to study Locutus a little , and thanks, as always, for your work.

Marco

P.S. any trip to Italy in the near future?

On mar, 2023-01-17 at 08:04 -0600, Ian Clarke wrote:
> Dear Freenet users and developers,
> 
> I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to inform you of an important
> change that the Freenet Project board voted on unanimously on Friday. After
> much discussion over the past 18 months, we have decided to rename the
> codebase and software known internally as "Fred," to "Freenet Classic."
> 
> In addition, we are announcing that the new codebase, known internally as
> "Locutus," will be renamed to "Freenet." We understand that this is a big
> change and it carries risk, but the board believes that this risk is necessary
> in order to further the project's mission.
> 
> It is important to note that this change does not mean that Locutus is
> replacing Fred, which solves related but different problems. We will ensure
> that where Fred is the appropriate tool for people they will be directed to
> it.  Freenetproject.org will remain focused on Fred while linking to Locutus -
> as it has been for over two decades - while freenet.org will place
> more emphasis on Locutus, while still linking to Fred.
> 
> We will be implementing these changes over the coming days and weeks and would
> be grateful for your ideas and suggestions on how best to do this.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Ian
> 

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Nicolas Hernandez]

!!! ???


Envoyé depuis ProtonMail mobile



\ Message d'origine 
Le 17 janv. 2023, 22:54, Ian Clarke < i...@freenetproject.org> a écrit :

>
>
>
> Steve,
>
>
>
>
> You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community. Who 
> specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability to speak for 
> them?
>
>
>
>
> Ian.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Steve Dougherty 
> <[st...@asksteved.com][steve_asksteved.com]> wrote:
>
>
> > Hi Ian,
> >
> > I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and the
> > rest of the board expected.
> >
> > This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the board
> > of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial plans
> > to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the rest of
> > the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand recognition.
> > The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
> > consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the effort
> > to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.
> >
> > I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
> > none.
> >
> > \- Steve
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> \--
>
>
> Ian Clarke
> Founder, The Freenet Project
> Email: [i...@freenetproject.org][ian_freenetproject.org]


[steve_asksteved.com]: mailto:st...@asksteved.com
[ian_freenetproject.org]: mailto:i...@freenetproject.org

publickey - EmailAddress(s=nicolas.hernandez@aleph-networks.com) - 0xAEB2E31C.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide]

Ian Clarke  writes:
> Apologies to mutt users, but Freenet's mainstream brand recognition has been 
> on an uninterrupted
> downward trajectory since 2004:
>
> freenet-trend.png

You are showing the US-trend. Let’s look at the trend in a country where
there was PR done:


This is the trend in Germany, and you’ll see it going up again in the
past year where I gave a presentation for a German non-profit.

What was missing for spreading was not technical. Missing was that we
did not talk enough in public about Freenet.

And brand recognition is good among long term internet freedom
activists, but only for the scope and use-cases of the current Freenet,
not for the different scope of Locutus.

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide]

Dear Freenet Contributors and Enthusiasts,

I want to clear up some of the confusion.

Ian Clarke  writes:
> I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to inform you of an important 
> change that the Freenet Project board voted on unanimously on Friday.
> After much discussion over the past 18 months

Ian wrote me private emails about his plan and I strongly objected. He
chose to ignore that. I do not know whether he talked to someone else.

There are no public archives, because these were just private emails.

After he agreed that others could email him, I talked to other release
managers and core developers.⁰ It is a shared understanding that this
renaming would damage Freenet. We had hoped that Ian would not go
through with this, so we did not write in public to prevent damage to
the project.

After he now wrote, the damage is done. We can only try to minimize it.

⁰: Before he said that other developers can contact him, I held it as a
   confidential discussion out of respect for the privacy of personal
   communication.

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:24 PM  wrote:

Thank you for your mostly reasonable response :)

On January 17, 2023 11:01:39 PM UTC, Ian Clarke 
> wrote:
> >I greatly appreciate the work you and the other maintainers have put into
> >Fred, which is why I took the time to listen to your concerns over the
> past
> >18 months.
>
> Is the a public place to review these, or FMS posts I have missed?
>

They were one-on-one emails between Arne and myself, although I had assumed
he would keep interested parties abreast of our conversation, at least at a
high level. I didn't ask him to keep anything a secret.


> >In my view and that of the board, Locutus is the best hope to achieve
> >Freenet's mission, given everything I know in 2023. That's not to say that
> >Locutus will replace Fred, it will not - because they serve different
> >needs. But Fred is a 23-year-old codebase, and the world is very different
> >from the world I saw when I started it, as is technology.
> >
> >I don't want conflict with you or the core maintainers, but the decision
> >has been made.
>
> Being authoritarian, especially in secret tends to cause conflict.
>

There was no secrecy, Arne was the person I thought most likely to disagree
and I sought his feedback starting 18 months ago.

In the end, I was unpersuaded by his argument, but that doesn't make me an
authoritarian. My job is to achieve the project's mission, I can't do that
if everyone gets a veto, that would be an abdication of my responsibility.
What I can do is hear people out, which is what I did with Arne.

Perhaps it was an incorrect assumption that Arne would relay our
discussions to other interested parties, in which case I apologize.

>Fighting it is only going to consume time, resources, emotion, and
> >attention that distracts from the goals that I know drive all of us.
>
> This is where I don't understand, and thus disagree.
> Renaming Fred to Freenet Classic will take time and resources, as will
> renaming Locutus to Freenet.


It seems like a way to gather all the positive branding and support the
> existing Freenet community has generated and built.


Apologies to mutt users, but Freenet's mainstream brand recognition has
been on an uninterrupted downward trajectory since 2004:

[image: freenet-trend.png]

I don't say this to disrespect Fred, but the value of "Freenet" as a brand
is in the fact that it literally describes our mission better than any
other name I've been able to come up with, the value is not in its current
mainstream brand recognition - which is zero.


> Would it not be better to also not confuse future users, they will
> probably stumble on outdated references for years to come? This change
> seems counterproductive with very limited benefit. I fail to see how
> keeping Locutus as Locutus is more risky and less rewarding?
>

I don't think people are confused by the concept of a sequel, just look at
Terminator 2 or Aliens. This is the same thing, just software not movies.
The websites will mutually link to each other, so any confusion will be
resolved rapidly upon visiting either website.

Like I said, there is risk - but in my view, the risk of inaction is
greater, and we may not have much more time in which to try. I need to give
it my best shot.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[freenet]

On January 17, 2023 11:01:39 PM UTC, Ian Clarke  wrote:
>I greatly appreciate the work you and the other maintainers have put into
>Fred, which is why I took the time to listen to your concerns over the past
>18 months.

Is the a public place to review these, or FMS posts I have missed?

>
>The bottom line is that after hearing you out, I simply don't agree with
>you.
>

So you veto it?

>In particular, I do not believe that the proposed changes will harm Fred,
>but rather, Fred should get a significant boost from the attention Locutus
>will receive if we are successful. There is no question that there is risk,
>but there is risk in every decision.
>
>My primary concern is for the next generation, who may ask me in 30 years
>if I did everything in my power to keep the Internet a force for freedom
>rather than oppression. This has always been the core mission of Freenet,
>not any specific codebase or feature set. *We are losing this battle, and
>we need to take action before it is lost*. Nobody gets a veto over this,
>not even Fred's maintainers or members of the current user base, value them
>as I do.
>

I agree with you here, Locutus is needed to help fulfill the goals outlined 
above.

>In my view and that of the board, Locutus is the best hope to achieve
>Freenet's mission, given everything I know in 2023. That's not to say that
>Locutus will replace Fred, it will not - because they serve different
>needs. But Fred is a 23-year-old codebase, and the world is very different
>from the world I saw when I started it, as is technology.
>
>I don't want conflict with you or the core maintainers, but the decision
>has been made.

Being authoritarian, especially in secret tends to cause conflict.
>
>Fighting it is only going to consume time, resources, emotion, and
>attention that distracts from the goals that I know drive all of us.

This is where I don't understand, and thus disagree. 
Renaming Fred to Freenet Classic will take time and resources, as will renaming 
Locutus to Freenet. It seems like a way to gather all the positive branding and 
support the existing Freenet community has generated and built. Would it not be 
better to also not confuse future users, they will probably stumble on outdated 
references for years to come? This change seems counterproductive with very 
limited benefit. I fail to see how keeping Locutus as Locutus is more risky and 
less rewarding?

>
>Ian.
>
>On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 4:15 PM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide 
>wrote:
>
>>
>> Ian Clarke  writes:
>> > You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community. Who
>> specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability to speak
>> for
>> > them?
>>
>> I share the sentiment. Steve spoke to me before sending this message,
>> and he also speaks for me, the release manager of Freenet. Also David,
>> Florent, and xor disagree strongly with the renaming plan. These are
>> most of the non-anonymous core developers of Freenet.
>>
>> And the actual Freenet community that communicates on Freenet via FMS
>> and Sone is absolutely enraged over this.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Arne
>>
>> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Steve Dougherty 
>> wrote:
>> >  I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and the
>> >  rest of the board expected.
>> >
>> >  This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the board
>> >  of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial plans
>> >  to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the rest of
>> >  the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand recognition.
>> >  The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
>> >  consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the effort
>> >  to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.
>> >
>> >  I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
>> >  none.
>> >
>> >  - Steve
>>
>>
>> --
>> Unpolitisch sein
>> heißt politisch sein,
>> ohne es zu merken.
>> draketo.de
>>
>
>

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

Arne,

I greatly appreciate the work you and the other maintainers have put into
Fred, which is why I took the time to listen to your concerns over the past
18 months.

The bottom line is that after hearing you out, I simply don't agree with
you.

In particular, I do not believe that the proposed changes will harm Fred,
but rather, Fred should get a significant boost from the attention Locutus
will receive if we are successful. There is no question that there is risk,
but there is risk in every decision.

My primary concern is for the next generation, who may ask me in 30 years
if I did everything in my power to keep the Internet a force for freedom
rather than oppression. This has always been the core mission of Freenet,
not any specific codebase or feature set. *We are losing this battle, and
we need to take action before it is lost*. Nobody gets a veto over this,
not even Fred's maintainers or members of the current user base, value them
as I do.

In my view and that of the board, Locutus is the best hope to achieve
Freenet's mission, given everything I know in 2023. That's not to say that
Locutus will replace Fred, it will not - because they serve different
needs. But Fred is a 23-year-old codebase, and the world is very different
from the world I saw when I started it, as is technology.

I don't want conflict with you or the core maintainers, but the decision
has been made.

Fighting it is only going to consume time, resources, emotion, and
attention that distracts from the goals that I know drive all of us.

Ian.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 4:15 PM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide 
wrote:

>
> Ian Clarke  writes:
> > You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community. Who
> specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability to speak
> for
> > them?
>
> I share the sentiment. Steve spoke to me before sending this message,
> and he also speaks for me, the release manager of Freenet. Also David,
> Florent, and xor disagree strongly with the renaming plan. These are
> most of the non-anonymous core developers of Freenet.
>
> And the actual Freenet community that communicates on Freenet via FMS
> and Sone is absolutely enraged over this.
>
> Best wishes,
> Arne
>
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Steve Dougherty 
> wrote:
> >  I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and the
> >  rest of the board expected.
> >
> >  This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the board
> >  of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial plans
> >  to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the rest of
> >  the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand recognition.
> >  The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
> >  consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the effort
> >  to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.
> >
> >  I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
> >  none.
> >
> >  - Steve
>
>
> --
> Unpolitisch sein
> heißt politisch sein,
> ohne es zu merken.
> draketo.de
>


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[s7r]

Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:


Ian Clarke  writes:

You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community. Who 
specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability to speak for
them?


I share the sentiment. Steve spoke to me before sending this message,
and he also speaks for me, the release manager of Freenet. Also David,
Florent, and xor disagree strongly with the renaming plan. These are
most of the non-anonymous core developers of Freenet.

And the actual Freenet community that communicates on Freenet via FMS
and Sone is absolutely enraged over this.

Best wishes,
Arne


Steve speaks in my name too, and I strongly share Steve and Arne's 
sentiments.




OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

Board discussions are confidential, this is common practice for non-profits
so that board members can speak freely. I'm happy to answer any questions
you have about this decision.

The grant from FUTO last year was hardly
 a secret, the video about it
had over 21,000 views.



On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 4:35 PM  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> As a non-contributor of code, but running nodes, and donating
> occasionally. How can I view the discussion that the board had? All I can
> find public tax documents that they received over $100,000 this year in
> donations. There is no board meeting minutes or mailing list (or paper
> trail)
>
> An anti-censorship project should be more transparent.
>
> Thanks,
>
> On January 17, 2023 10:06:51 PM UTC, "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <
> arne_...@web.de> wrote:
> >
> >Ian Clarke  writes:
> >> You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community. Who
> specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability to speak
> for
> >> them?
> >
> >I share the sentiment. Steve spoke to me before sending this message,
> >and he also speaks for me, the release manager of Freenet. Also David,
> >Florent, and xor disagree strongly with the renaming plan. These are
> >most of the non-anonymous core developers of Freenet.
> >
> >And the actual Freenet community that communicates on Freenet via FMS
> >and Sone is absolutely enraged over this.
> >
> >Best wishes,
> >Arne
> >
> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Steve Dougherty 
> wrote:
> >>  I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and the
> >>  rest of the board expected.
> >>
> >>  This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the
> board
> >>  of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial plans
> >>  to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the rest
> of
> >>  the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand recognition.
> >>  The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
> >>  consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the
> effort
> >>  to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.
> >>
> >>  I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
> >>  none.
> >>
> >>  - Steve
> >
> >
>


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[freenet]

Hi, 

As a non-contributor of code, but running nodes, and donating occasionally. How 
can I view the discussion that the board had? All I can find public tax 
documents that they received over $100,000 this year in donations. There is no 
board meeting minutes or mailing list (or paper trail)

An anti-censorship project should be more transparent.

Thanks,

On January 17, 2023 10:06:51 PM UTC, "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" 
 wrote:
>
>Ian Clarke  writes:
>> You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community. Who 
>> specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability to speak for
>> them?
>
>I share the sentiment. Steve spoke to me before sending this message,
>and he also speaks for me, the release manager of Freenet. Also David,
>Florent, and xor disagree strongly with the renaming plan. These are
>most of the non-anonymous core developers of Freenet.
>
>And the actual Freenet community that communicates on Freenet via FMS
>and Sone is absolutely enraged over this.
>
>Best wishes,
>Arne
>
>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Steve Dougherty  wrote:
>>  I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and the
>>  rest of the board expected.
>>
>>  This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the board
>>  of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial plans
>>  to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the rest of
>>  the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand recognition.
>>  The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
>>  consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the effort
>>  to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.
>>
>>  I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
>>  none.
>>
>>  - Steve
>
>

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide]

Ian Clarke  writes:
> You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community. Who 
> specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability to speak for
> them?

I share the sentiment. Steve spoke to me before sending this message,
and he also speaks for me, the release manager of Freenet. Also David,
Florent, and xor disagree strongly with the renaming plan. These are
most of the non-anonymous core developers of Freenet.

And the actual Freenet community that communicates on Freenet via FMS
and Sone is absolutely enraged over this.

Best wishes,
Arne

> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Steve Dougherty  wrote:
>  I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and the
>  rest of the board expected.
>
>  This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the board
>  of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial plans
>  to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the rest of
>  the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand recognition.
>  The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
>  consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the effort
>  to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.
>
>  I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
>  none.
>
>  - Steve


-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Ian Clarke]

Steve,

You're speaking as if you speak on behalf of the Freenet community. Who
specifically are you speaking for and what gives you the ability to speak
for them?

Ian.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Steve Dougherty  wrote:

> Hi Ian,
>
> I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and the
> rest of the board expected.
>
> This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the board
> of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial plans
> to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the rest of
> the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand recognition.
> The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
> consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the effort
> to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.
>
> I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
> none.
>
> - Steve
>


-- 
Ian Clarke
Founder, The Freenet Project
Email: i...@freenetproject.org

Re: Important Announcement: Freenet naming change

[Steve Dougherty]

Hi Ian,

I'm surprised. I'm not sure what to say, or what reaction you and the
rest of the board expected.

This is another demonstration of a complete disconnect between the board
of FPI, and the community around Freenet. After giving up initial plans
to name Locutus "Freenet 2" in the face of backlash, you and the rest of
the board appear to now want still more of Freenet's brand recognition.
The hope seems to be that the Freenet community, having not been
consulted, and reasonably assumed to disagree, will undertake the effort
to rename themselves the Freenet Classic community.

I don't think this will happen. It would require buy-in, and it has
none.

- Steve