4 ms·
Why did people object? Because "purchased" makes it legitimate?
by eplanit 5y ago
Why did people object? Because "purchased" makes it legitimate?
- gojomo 5y agoNot fully up on the controversy, but I suspect because it implied the "freenode IRC network" is something that can be "owned" - when it's more complicated than that. (A company can be owned, legally, sure, but an ongoing-set-of-relationships, & mostly-volunteer processes, is usually something more than property with neat property-title.)
- corobo 5y agoLooks like it got pretty owned tbf
- that_guy_iain 5y agoRealistically, the infrastructure for the servers can be replace and when that is done there is a high chance >75% of the users remain. There will always be other people willing to volunteer. I remember the AOL ICQ IRC had volunteer opers and there is no way you can think that wasn't fully a for-profit setup.
- gojomo 5y agoIf your analysis centers on 'servers', I think you're missing the point of concerns about describing an "IRC network" as being "purchased", and other aspects that make some Freenode channels interesting.
- that_guy_iain 5y agoI think you miss the point, my point is that point is moot. A community is about people, if the people don't move the community stays. Sure there seems to be some very vocal very committed staffers leaving but a major part of Freenode when I was using it was the people who had massive amount of knowledge and were sharing it on a regular basis. If those people stay then Freenode lives on even as a corporate sell out.
- unixhero 5y agoPeople will overfor free if you give them power and status
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]