3 ms·

I'm a little confused by all this controversy. I'm no stranger to people trying to exert secret influence in open-source projects, and put themselves in positio

by macksd 5y ago

I'm a little confused by all this controversy. I'm no stranger to people trying to exert secret influence in open-source projects, and put themselves in positions of power to satisfy egos, etc. and I certainly don't like that kind of thing. But what was actually done on Freenode? I've read several of the volunteer resignations and it seems to just be that they're obviously now in control and people don't like that. Is there something more concrete they've done that points to a particular ulterior motive or the negative impact of their ownership? Am I just missing some historical baggage?

marcan_42 5y ago
It seems Lee actively sought to take over the operational access to the network, brought in staff outside of the existing staff process, and started exercising editorial control over the Freenode website. So if you mean "is there actual end-user operational impact to the network", it seems that there isn't so far, but the way Lee took over everything does not bode well and I completely understand why the existing staff resigned. When staff processes change so suddenly and abruptly, end-user visible changes tend to follow, and in any case this warrants significant loss of trust.