| 13 Mar 2024 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | because this sure is starting to feel like a pattern | 19:13:33 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | and you can't exactly argue that you didn't see it coming, this time | 19:13:57 |
 K. Werty | In reply to @theophane:hufschmitt.net
Can everyone please cool down a little? Half on us are giving help with the last minute préparions of a conference, so yes, we're quite unresponsive right now. My most immediate problem right now is to help the Scale team netboot a cluster of raspis with tftp over IPv6. If you know how to do that, you're welcome to help. nah, this is actually way more important, and you've gotta realize that that statement isn't gonna cool people down at all | 19:14:18 |
| K. Werty | In reply to @theophane:hufschmitt.net
Can everyone please cool down a little? Half on us are giving help with the last minute préparions of a conference, so yes, we're quite unresponsive right now. My most immediate problem right now is to help the Scale team netboot a cluster of raspis with tftp over IPv6. If you know how to do that, you're welcome to help. * nah, this is actually way more important, and you've gotta realize that that statement isn't gonna cool people down at all (definitely had the opposite effect on me personally) | 19:16:21 |
 patka | In reply to @theophane:hufschmitt.net
Can everyone please cool down a little? Half on us are giving help with the last minute préparions of a conference, so yes, we're quite unresponsive right now. My most immediate problem right now is to help the Scale team netboot a cluster of raspis with tftp over IPv6. If you know how to do that, you're welcome to help. Wow, even more reason why the foundation is unfit for the job. | 19:16:22 |
| patka | In reply to @theophane:hufschmitt.net
Can everyone please cool down a little? Half on us are giving help with the last minute préparions of a conference, so yes, we're quite unresponsive right now. My most immediate problem right now is to help the Scale team netboot a cluster of raspis with tftp over IPv6. If you know how to do that, you're welcome to help. This is really your answer to the concerns so many have? | 19:17:16 |
 Manu [tennox] | I agree with the letter and it's intentions (also signed it)
But I don't agree with the amount of stress and turmoil I'm seeing here.
I agree that - as far as I have seen - the handling from "the foundation" (also mostly a bunch of volunteers) is poor and lacking transparency.
But if we want to support peace in the world I think we gotta start with a humbleness here and realize that this does not serve.
The letter has set a clear statement and now it's also time to let dust settle and let things move.
All of us involved here are also just: humans. | 19:22:42 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | Manu [tennox]: the problem with "letting the dust settle and letting things move" - as I intended to do above, actually - is that it requires for there to be some sort of signal that the feedback has been received and will be taken into consideration seriously. the reason people are angry is because it is abundantly clear that that is not actually happenin | 19:24:03 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | * Manu [tennox]: the problem with "letting the dust settle and letting things move" - as I intended to do above, actually - is that it requires for there to be some sort of signal that the feedback has been received and will be taken into consideration seriously. the reason people are angry is because it is abundantly clear that that is not actually happening | 19:24:04 |
| Manu [tennox] | I see | 19:24:26 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | and in that context, "letting the dust settle and letting things move" boils down to "nothing will happen and things won't change". it would be different if there had been a receptive response | 19:24:52 |
 ronef | Thanks for clarifying this, that was helpful as I felt I missed something between the call to the following | 19:25:17 |
| patka | In reply to @tennox:matrix.org
I agree with the letter and it's intentions (also signed it)
But I don't agree with the amount of stress and turmoil I'm seeing here.
I agree that - as far as I have seen - the handling from "the foundation" (also mostly a bunch of volunteers) is poor and lacking transparency.
But if we want to support peace in the world I think we gotta start with a humbleness here and realize that this does not serve.
The letter has set a clear statement and now it's also time to let dust settle and let things move.
All of us involved here are also just: humans. The big problem here is that a foundation is there to at least acknowledge a community. @Théophane is saying go away. @Eelco is only adding a heart emoji and @ronef is just lurking. | 19:25:43 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | as further clarification, I expect that this comment in particular did not help: https://matrix.to/#/!CJXQiUGqNPcFonEdME:nixos.org/$wqhw2GMwsigm8lamlO7gxkb1RwepG4ZbqFDcRDTOaE8?via=nixos.org&via=matrix.org&via=nixos.dev | 19:26:01 |
| Manu [tennox] | They is not saying "go away" they are saying "I have heard you and I don't have time" | 19:26:28 |
| Manu [tennox] | * They are not saying "go away" they are saying "I have heard you and I don't have time" | 19:26:39 |
 delroth | In reply to @joepie91:pixie.town
Manu [tennox]: the problem with "letting the dust settle and letting things move" - as I intended to do above, actually - is that it requires for there to be some sort of signal that the feedback has been received and will be taken into consideration seriously. the reason people are angry is because it is abundantly clear that that is not actually happening to be maybe even more clear: it's not that there is no signal that the feedback was received, it's that there was signal that the feedback would be ignored: the foundation board explicitly said they'd follow an unapproved policy which goes against the community's outcry in Sept 2023 (and written by someone with imo a clear conflict of interest), and the foundation chair explicitly said they're uninterested in having any kind of policy past checking if a sponsor is legal | 19:26:53 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | yeah, fair, that is probably a better summary | 19:27:15 |
| ronef | Again thank you for that summary as it helps clarify how I perceive the feeling being on your end | 19:27:49 |
| Manu [tennox] | Damn. That sucks! | 19:28:27 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | that they don't have time is not really a credible thing in this case, because this exact scenario happened last time | 19:29:26 |
 @ultranix:matrix.org | In reply to @delroth:delroth.net
to be maybe even more clear: it's not that there is no signal that the feedback was received, it's that there was signal that the feedback would be ignored: the foundation board explicitly said they'd follow an unapproved policy which goes against the community's outcry in Sept 2023 (and written by someone with imo a clear conflict of interest), and the foundation chair explicitly said they're uninterested in having any kind of policy past checking if a sponsor is legal Is there some policy pertaining to the petition that was proposed after Sept 2023, besides tomberek 's? | 19:29:28 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | and so they've had every opportunity to see this coming and prepare for it, and chose not to | 19:29:41 |
| ronef | I left the meeting today feeling that the direction was open to define a policy that we can all agree to. I believed I tried to portray that but that doesn't cancel at all the feelings anyone left with. | 19:29:53 |
| ronef | I personally have a bias towards bottom up decision making, but I did hear mentions during the conversation that made me think more about that. | 19:30:52 |
|  @phileas:asra.gr joined the room. | 19:31:35 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | In reply to @ronef:matrix.org
I left the meeting today feeling that the direction was open to define a policy that we can all agree to. I believed I tried to portray that but that doesn't cancel at all the feelings anyone left with. can this openness to an adjusted policy (and commitment to fair consideration) be formalized in some way? I expect that that would help a lot | 19:32:08 |
| delroth | In reply to @ultranix:matrix.org
Is there some policy pertaining to the petition that was proposed after Sept 2023, besides tomberek 's? no, all we had was a precedent of an Anduril sponsorship being seen as undesirable by many contributors, which seem to have been forgotten in the proposed policy draft | 19:35:23 |
| delroth | sponsoring policy proposal:
- not Anduril;
- other sponsors to be handled via the historical ad-hoc process
approved? seems like an improvement over the current status-quo
| 19:36:11 |
| delroth | since apparently we need to make concrete policy proposals | 19:36:29 |
