10 ms·

As an outsider who hasn't used IRC or Freenode in over a decade, this situation is impenetrable. Neither the posts by the Freenode volunteers nor this post by A

As an outsider who hasn't used IRC or Freenode in over a decade, this situation is impenetrable. Neither the posts by the Freenode volunteers nor this post by Andrew paint a coherent narrative I can follow (maybe I'm just old). Best I can gather, the flashpoint that triggered this series of events is a dispute over the control of the freenode domain name and DNS servers?

barneygale 5y ago
The FreeNode staff (rightly) don't want FreeNode's operations taken over by the owner of a VPN company and former CFO of Mt Gox. They're not obliged to work for this cretin.
tremon 5y ago
I think the flashpoint was the nasty lawyerese received by the newly-instated head of staff (tomaw) after he had been elected. The story is impenetrable because, from what I gather, the lawyerese contained a gag order not to discuss the contents of the letter.
- rasengan 5y ago
  These letters were sent both ways. That’s why I was unable to speak until now.
  - mnordhoff 5y ago
    Who sent them first, and why?
mynameisvlad 5y ago
It sounds like rasengan/Andrew Lee wanted a specific DNS change made which was objectionable to the staff, and that triggered the whole mess. I hadn’t seen it mentioned before but one of the chats from Thomas includes something about backing off from a DNS change.
- Juntu 5y ago
  DNS connection vlad tepes changing it sounds like Newton on a time bomb. Tagging people is never an illegal legal con pros assumption therefore luck is not the answer. Decode the system and apply pure power capacity mb to gb
- rasengan 5y ago
  I was cut off from the domains 2 days after tomaw asked me to give him ownership. So I was asking to revert a change not make a new one.
rasengan 5y ago
Hi this is Andrew from the post and freenode. Long story short, former staff were upset about a logo but the logos were there since the start. I wanted to share that. Secondly, staff claim there was a hostile takeover. I have owned freenode for years and was a great custodian as far as I can tell (only compliments from former staff some of which even flew into defcon and came to my house on my dime, internationally) - I intervened when a hostile takeover from the inside began taking place - my dns was cut and the internal structure was changing to a non democratic one. All of this is detailed in the post and screenshots for proof since there’s been a lot of falsehoods spread. I had to step in and did just in time.
- forgotmypw17 5y ago
  Thank you for taking the time, Andrew. I have noticed this pattern in many online communities which are controlled by one or small group of people, I think it's straight from the playbook.
  - rasengan 5y ago
    I agree and you’re very welcome!
- tapoxi 5y ago
  From what I've read it seems like you generally seem to have Freenode's interests at heart, but this seems like a complete communication failure. Most channels I've been a part of have moved to Libera Chat, so I don't think Freenode in its current form can recover from this. Maybe you should consider incorporating it as a nonprofit and potentially a technology switch to Matrix? It would be nice to have a homeserver that people can rely on and isn't Matrix.org.
  - hhvn 5y ago
    One of the main points of matrix is that every server should be compatible and form a federation with others. What is the point of moving people onto a specific server? With IRC freenode has a control structure that can enforce their rules/guidelines, this breaks with matrix.
ilaksh 5y ago
The posts by the volunteers were quite coherent. This one by Lee is not.
neilv 5y ago
I couldn't unravel it in a 10-minute skim, over lunch just now. I speculate that one of the causes of this confusion (which is eerily familiar, from countless other disputes in community projects) is that people involved in community project disputes tend not enlist professional communicators to represent their perspective, and the disputes don't tend to be covered by investigative journalists. And outsiders just aren't interested to unravel it. Many individuals invest much of their lives into community projects, sometimes with little else left, and aren't prepared for suddenly being subject to the court of public opinion. And the public generally isn't invested enough in the matter, to work long to understand it. Anyway, it sounds unfortunate that Freenode appears to be going through a rough time, and I hope good comes out of this period of its history. FWIW, before Freenode started, lilo was on other networks, and I recall him asking how to create a nonprofit organization, which I assumed that was what became Freenode. I think the intent was to have a legal structure that would permit an IRC network to sustainably represent particular community interests.
- lonjil 5y ago
  Freenode doesn't have any sort of non-profit. Freenode Ltd was created much later and only for organising Freenode Live. Libera.Chat does have a non-profit, however, according to the announcement.
  - neilv 5y ago
    Looks like this PDPC charity might've been what lilo ended up doing to try to make Freenode sustainable (though my guess is that it didn't "own" Freenode)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenode#Peer-Directed_Projects_Center https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenode#Peer-Directed_Project...
    - Macha 5y ago
      Christel only legally owned anything of Freenode to sell to Andrew Lee because she took it over in the dissolution of PDPC. If PDPC never legally owned Freenode, it would be owned by... Rob Levin's estate? So I think PDPC did own Freenode in some form.
soneil 5y ago
The best I can piece together so far: * freenode was run by elected volunteers. * Lee stepped in to sponsor/fund the Freenode Live events * Some assets were sold/transferred to Lee in the process of this * Former staff admin leaves, new staff admin is elected * New staff admin attempts to take control of assets they (reasonably) assume they should have control of * Lee (reasonably) perceives this as control of assets being taken away from him - it's at this point we discover more about which assets were sold/transferred. * Recent events driven by elected leadership discovering they're not actually leadership. Essentially freenode has had a leadership vacuum for some time, and has been perfectly comfortable with that. But nature abhors a vacuum .. You might note I have two groups marked as (reasonably) in opposite directions. As far as I can tell this is an information gap - what was sold/transferred was kept very, very quiet, so I do believe each side was behaving reasonably with the information available to them. So I believe what we're seeing this week, is what we would have seen during the actual sale, if these details were made remotely public at the time.
- fapjacks 5y ago
  It always comes down to money or power.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- kuschku 5y ago
  Here is a continuous quote (nothing omitted except the start/end of conversation) from a discussion between Andrew Lee and me from 2017: [2017-08-03 11:48:56.616000] <rasengan_> justJanne: I like the way you think about a lot of things and doubly appreciate the fact that you share these thoughts so that others can know and understand the realities of them as well. But, I do want to emphasize that while I am in fact listed on some piece of paper for a couple of IRC networks, I am not in control of any. That's not only a promise made, and my word means so much, but it's a reality: I don't have an O. [Editor's note: O, or +O, means that the person is operator and has administrative control over the network] [2017-08-03 11:48:56.789000] <rasengan_> Whenever something comes up I don't get involved or don't even know. (ps: plz excuse my space bar i think there is something wrong wiht my driver) [2017-08-03 11:49:37.530000] <rasengan_> But the thing is IRC has alwasy been a glorious thing. The infra has always been sposnored by companies or people. But the great thing about IRC i s you can always vote and let the networks and world know which you choose - by using /server. [Editor's note: /server is a command used to switch from one network to another] [2017-08-04 21:48:37.553000] <rasengan_> I'm fully confident though if PIA were to show any kind of negative intentions, people would /quit fast. [Editor's note: /quit is a command to disconnect from a network] His statements that he had no control and would never have it were believed by staff all those years, but due to experience interacting with him I never did and have warned against this very scenario ever since the sale (which prompted above interaction).
corobo 5y ago
In a weird way I sort of like the drama, reminds me of the old wild westy IRC days haha A thought occurs -- this is probably the last big IRC network drama
- wowaname 5y ago
  The drama is "interesting" but it becomes disgusting when I realise that this affects people who just want a stable communication platform and don't care about the politics.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - corobo 5y ago
    Yeah interesting in the same sense as watching a nature documentary and seeing the natural lifestyle of animals including being eaten by other animals Interesting doesn't imply good

barneygale 5y ago

The FreeNode staff (rightly) don't want FreeNode's operations taken over by the owner of a VPN company and former CFO of Mt Gox. They're not obliged to work for this cretin.

tremon 5y ago

I think the flashpoint was the nasty lawyerese received by the newly-instated head of staff (tomaw) after he had been elected. The story is impenetrable because, from what I gather, the lawyerese contained a gag order not to discuss the contents of the letter.

rasengan 5y ago
These letters were sent both ways. That’s why I was unable to speak until now.
- mnordhoff 5y ago
  Who sent them first, and why?

mynameisvlad 5y ago

It sounds like rasengan/Andrew Lee wanted a specific DNS change made which was objectionable to the staff, and that triggered the whole mess. I hadn’t seen it mentioned before but one of the chats from Thomas includes something about backing off from a DNS change.

Juntu 5y ago
DNS connection vlad tepes changing it sounds like Newton on a time bomb. Tagging people is never an illegal legal con pros assumption therefore luck is not the answer. Decode the system and apply pure power capacity mb to gb
rasengan 5y ago
I was cut off from the domains 2 days after tomaw asked me to give him ownership. So I was asking to revert a change not make a new one.

rasengan 5y ago

Hi this is Andrew from the post and freenode. Long story short, former staff were upset about a logo but the logos were there since the start. I wanted to share that. Secondly, staff claim there was a hostile takeover. I have owned freenode for years and was a great custodian as far as I can tell (only compliments from former staff some of which even flew into defcon and came to my house on my dime, internationally) - I intervened when a hostile takeover from the inside began taking place - my dns was cut and the internal structure was changing to a non democratic one. All of this is detailed in the post and screenshots for proof since there’s been a lot of falsehoods spread. I had to step in and did just in time.

forgotmypw17 5y ago
Thank you for taking the time, Andrew. I have noticed this pattern in many online communities which are controlled by one or small group of people, I think it's straight from the playbook.
- rasengan 5y ago
  I agree and you’re very welcome!
tapoxi 5y ago
From what I've read it seems like you generally seem to have Freenode's interests at heart, but this seems like a complete communication failure. Most channels I've been a part of have moved to Libera Chat, so I don't think Freenode in its current form can recover from this. Maybe you should consider incorporating it as a nonprofit and potentially a technology switch to Matrix? It would be nice to have a homeserver that people can rely on and isn't Matrix.org.
- hhvn 5y ago
  One of the main points of matrix is that every server should be compatible and form a federation with others. What is the point of moving people onto a specific server? With IRC freenode has a control structure that can enforce their rules/guidelines, this breaks with matrix.

ilaksh 5y ago

The posts by the volunteers were quite coherent. This one by Lee is not.

neilv 5y ago

I couldn't unravel it in a 10-minute skim, over lunch just now. I speculate that one of the causes of this confusion (which is eerily familiar, from countless other disputes in community projects) is that people involved in community project disputes tend not enlist professional communicators to represent their perspective, and the disputes don't tend to be covered by investigative journalists. And outsiders just aren't interested to unravel it. Many individuals invest much of their lives into community projects, sometimes with little else left, and aren't prepared for suddenly being subject to the court of public opinion. And the public generally isn't invested enough in the matter, to work long to understand it. Anyway, it sounds unfortunate that Freenode appears to be going through a rough time, and I hope good comes out of this period of its history. FWIW, before Freenode started, lilo was on other networks, and I recall him asking how to create a nonprofit organization, which I assumed that was what became Freenode. I think the intent was to have a legal structure that would permit an IRC network to sustainably represent particular community interests.

lonjil 5y ago
Freenode doesn't have any sort of non-profit. Freenode Ltd was created much later and only for organising Freenode Live. Libera.Chat does have a non-profit, however, according to the announcement.
- neilv 5y ago
  Looks like this PDPC charity might've been what lilo ended up doing to try to make Freenode sustainable (though my guess is that it didn't "own" Freenode)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenode#Peer-Directed_Projects_Center https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenode#Peer-Directed_Project...
  - Macha 5y ago
    Christel only legally owned anything of Freenode to sell to Andrew Lee because she took it over in the dissolution of PDPC. If PDPC never legally owned Freenode, it would be owned by... Rob Levin's estate? So I think PDPC did own Freenode in some form.

soneil 5y ago

The best I can piece together so far: * freenode was run by elected volunteers. * Lee stepped in to sponsor/fund the Freenode Live events * Some assets were sold/transferred to Lee in the process of this * Former staff admin leaves, new staff admin is elected * New staff admin attempts to take control of assets they (reasonably) assume they should have control of * Lee (reasonably) perceives this as control of assets being taken away from him - it's at this point we discover more about which assets were sold/transferred. * Recent events driven by elected leadership discovering they're not actually leadership. Essentially freenode has had a leadership vacuum for some time, and has been perfectly comfortable with that. But nature abhors a vacuum .. You might note I have two groups marked as (reasonably) in opposite directions. As far as I can tell this is an information gap - what was sold/transferred was kept very, very quiet, so I do believe each side was behaving reasonably with the information available to them. So I believe what we're seeing this week, is what we would have seen during the actual sale, if these details were made remotely public at the time.

fapjacks 5y ago
It always comes down to money or power.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
kuschku 5y ago
Here is a continuous quote (nothing omitted except the start/end of conversation) from a discussion between Andrew Lee and me from 2017: [2017-08-03 11:48:56.616000] <rasengan_> justJanne: I like the way you think about a lot of things and doubly appreciate the fact that you share these thoughts so that others can know and understand the realities of them as well. But, I do want to emphasize that while I am in fact listed on some piece of paper for a couple of IRC networks, I am not in control of any. That's not only a promise made, and my word means so much, but it's a reality: I don't have an O. [Editor's note: O, or +O, means that the person is operator and has administrative control over the network] [2017-08-03 11:48:56.789000] <rasengan_> Whenever something comes up I don't get involved or don't even know. (ps: plz excuse my space bar i think there is something wrong wiht my driver) [2017-08-03 11:49:37.530000] <rasengan_> But the thing is IRC has alwasy been a glorious thing. The infra has always been sposnored by companies or people. But the great thing about IRC i s you can always vote and let the networks and world know which you choose - by using /server. [Editor's note: /server is a command used to switch from one network to another] [2017-08-04 21:48:37.553000] <rasengan_> I'm fully confident though if PIA were to show any kind of negative intentions, people would /quit fast. [Editor's note: /quit is a command to disconnect from a network] His statements that he had no control and would never have it were believed by staff all those years, but due to experience interacting with him I never did and have warned against this very scenario ever since the sale (which prompted above interaction).

corobo 5y ago

In a weird way I sort of like the drama, reminds me of the old wild westy IRC days haha A thought occurs -- this is probably the last big IRC network drama

wowaname 5y ago
The drama is "interesting" but it becomes disgusting when I realise that this affects people who just want a stable communication platform and don't care about the politics.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- corobo 5y ago
  Yeah interesting in the same sense as watching a nature documentary and seeing the natural lifestyle of animals including being eaten by other animals Interesting doesn't imply good