www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com>
Subject Re: Impasses and decision-making
Date Sun, 07 Jun 2015 20:45:33 GMT
If you wish to have policy changes, then, as Greg said:

submit a formal proposal to VP Legal Affairs.
The VP and his committee (which includes you!) haven't appeared to 
formally vote/discuss the adoption of any of your proposals. Since they 
haven't jumped on it already, it's your next move to try and get them 

ie, nobody is telling you to "stop bothering them with policy changes." 
Rather, you were *encouraged* to take the next step. This is so far from 
"refuse to consider changing itself", as you seem to wish to believe.

If you wish to make documentation changed (ie, to document various legal 
and standards things to go with releases) you'd need to engage with the 
dev list of the particular project that needs these things documented. 
In every case, that is a public list.

If, for example, you feel that Apache Cordova has a patent issue that 
needs to be documented, you would engage with the dev@cordova.apache.org 
mailing list - a public mailing list - with the proposed change. (Not 
that I'm aware of a problem there - it's just the first project that 
came to mind.)

The comments in your email are perplexing, and make me wonder if you 
know how things work around here. Yes, foundation-level policy decisions 
happen at the foundation (board) level, and the board is elected by the 
membership. Nobody is challenging that that's a democratic process.

However, project-level decisions happen because someone steps up and 
does the work. So, again, if you want patents (or whatever) documented 
at the project level, someone needs to actually step up and do that. You 
keep saying that you're the one that's qualified to do it. I'm 
encouraging you to go ahead and do it. You are acting like this is 
somehow unreasonable. Yet that is how every single one of us here got 
involved in making things happen on Apache projects. It's unclear to me 
how this is a reasonable expectation for every person here, except for 
your august self.

You also appear to still not understand why you were banned from private 
lists. It's because you tend to behave yourself like a civilized, polite 
person when it's in the public record.

However, it continues to seem very unlikely to me that you actually need 
any of these things explained to you. I think, rather, that you're just 
trying to pick a fight because you thrive on controversy, and are 
looking for opportunities to demonstrate what evil, power-grubbing 
people the current cabal, I mean board, really are.

So, once again, I encourage you to read what is actually said above, 
without your filters of resentment. Greg is encouraging you to take your 
proposed policy changes to the next step of the process. I am 
encouraging you to take the specific things you'd like to see documented 
to the project dev lists where those changes would actually be made. ie, 
in each case, we're trying to encourage you to move forward with the 
things that you're talking about. If you could, for a moment, step back 
from vilifying people, and actually look at what's being communicated, 
we could all make some progress here.

I have a long-standing policy of not responding to email from you. Every 
time I break this policy, I regret it. I have this policy because, 
invariably, conversation with you leads to this kind of exchange where 
you question everyone's motives and say generally unproductive things 
about how everyone but you is wrong-headed and probably trying to 
undermine you. This is very, very tiresome. I respectfully ask you to 
quit it. It's boring. It's tired. It's old. It's pointless.

Just stop. Please. Indeed, the very first email that I ever sent you, 
years ago, was making exactly this same request. I have never stopped 
making this request. If you want to help move the Foundation along, 
great, step up and make it happen. If you just want to fling mud, please 
go away.

On 06/07/2015 03:53 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> Colleagues and friends,
> After receiving two on-list responses from ASF board members (Rich Bowen, Greg Stein)
and one from our president (Ross Gardler), I feel obliged to differ. All three said "we are
a do-ocracy" and they told me to do what I want by myself and to stop bothering them with
proposed policy changes. This is ludicrous.
> Actually we are a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation governed by our own Bylaws and by
the laws of Delaware and the United States. We should groan loudly when officers of ASF declare
we are not a democracy. Someone besides me should object when a board member says to take
my issues to a private Apache list where I am temporarily banned by the board from even posting
and where the few board participants there already disagree with me. I've been trying that
for several years now and it has accomplished nothing but my being banned under the so-called
CoC because the Peter Pan crew here wants to have fun.
> I've been an open source lawyer since before ASF was even incorporated. It saddens me
to see this important institution refuse to consider changing itself to conform to the laws
and FOSS licenses of today. Fortunately, ASF is a democracy and it elects its board and officers
every year. There is hope.
> There is also great FOSS software here. Please stay with us while we try to evolve!
> /Larry

Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon

To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message