Why don't i surrender adempiere.org?

Just scream. We know you want to.
Forum rules
There will be no censorship here. There is no government here. There is only freedom.

Why don't i surrender adempiere.org?

Postby red1 » Sat Apr 02, 2011 11:22 pm

I am answering here so as not to feed the toxic waste there. This is intended to respond to http://sourceforge.net/projects/adempie ... ic/4414949

Dear Norbert,
You said,
As far as I know (I can check with limesurvey) ... you did not object to the election.
I thought Lime-survey is used so that no one can reveal how i vote. I am literally taken aback that you just did. You wasted more than my vote by revealing it as it is no longer valid. It can prove collusion on your part. I know your intention is good and you may still have not collude with other members. But how can i be sure? The wanton abuse of such power is telling on how much more abuse you may go at in order to prove your point of view which is not neutral anymore. Anyway, breaking the secrecy of Lime-survey should be seen as a serious offense and i call on the governing authority in ADempiere to censor such an act. But would they? I don't think so. So if there is no visible justice, can I place my trust in such an authority?

*Sigh* Well! I am supposed to be the criminal here, as you would arrest me if you have a police force. And that police or authority as we now supposed to look up to will not hold you accountable at all. So let me get back to defending myself again for not surrendering the URL just yet. Remember that in 2007 in Berlin we wanted to give it to ADempiere Foundation Inc, USA. AFAIR it was shot down because there is doubt that its safe according to the laws and context of US as well as protecting from a possible JJ suit on US soil rather than our own hands. And i distinctively remembered that after fresh from forking away from Compiere, we referred heavily to ComPiere Inc USA as 'commercial' open source rather than community and feared a return to Uncle Jones' Animal Farm of marketeering. And thus the community was happy with the URLs been in my hands and my recommendation that they be spread out with Carlos Ruiz holding the .com. For more than 4 years there has been no issue nor fume over us been trustees nor have we abused such trust.

Fast forward, the quitting of us from PMC and governing the bazaar was to hand over to a more 'respectable' body i.e. ADeV to handle the issue of non-confidence or refusal to work (by a minority lesser contributive group) with PMC Head that time, Carlos Ruiz. That is the time of the known case of ABC overriding the OI/OC in an open PMC-led discussion in accordance to rules already agreed by Citizens that time. The PMC Head has in consultation with me exercised his charter given prerogative to relieve others who abused the trunk from admin rights. That constitutional act was challenged unconstitutionally when he has his 25 vote count vs 19 authority. We have allowed a 5 vote veto as part of our constitution but that was never used. It shows that they are not confident of using it. Instead they accuse Carlos of failing to work with them. How can one who claims so be free from question and the one who is duly elected be subjected to the crime of been 'uncooperative'? If a person A says, "I cannot work with you. Therefore you are guilty. I am not". Can that be right? Since when?

With such absurdity happening we had appealed to ADeV to intervene but i guess that was slow in acoming to anyone's defence. In fact it is ADeV's honourable Chairman that told me of this. I told him back, can that complainant be a better candidate for PMC Head. And his answer is 'No'. So ADeV was not the party to help us even though we were legitimate that time. Their inaction was not only fatal but mischevious, if seen from what is happening today. Albert Einstein is said to have said, "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." Today, we see the ADeV is suddenly energetic and eager to do something when Carlos Ruiz is gone. But what its agenda? Is it eager for good coding work to resume? Is it trying to make more version releases? Or is it more eager to do marketing around this public project for the benefit of a few of the individuals under cover? If you ask me, i don't know. I am quite naive. I trusted so many people. But today i cannot remain silent. And i do not want to start a war. That is why i return to somewhere which defined what i was all about. It is here i remembered my 3 line mantra of making Contributors Priceless.

Thus you may have got it the other way around. As if we are against Citizens and we are traitors. The originating causes of this whole latest fiasco, among which are the sudden, non-PMC exercised removal of shell access from Carlos Ruiz without provocation and removal of my admin rights also without any provocation nor breaking of bazaar rules from my part caused us to seriously doubt your agenda this time.

AFAIU, admins are a working class that manage real work and should not be held by Foundation or Council members. It was not during my time and i gave rights to those who do real work. Today the situation has drastically changed. I did not simply grant nor take away rights without consultation with other project admins and technical experts and with public, open nomination and some vote support. Now positions in ADempiere is seen as a prestige and luxury and not as a burden that takes away much of your free time for the sake of the community. To be an admin in this project means you are among the most hard working person. It is not a right and privilege but hard-earned role thru the years of sweat and tears. Now the trunk has grown very quiet and uneventful. Yet some party is eager of consolidating power, think marketing and presenting it to the world in coat and tie rather than making the software better or be honest about what is not fixed in it. They took the hard earned work of others to claim as their own. In short this is no longer a bazaar approach but a concordance aiming to be a cathedral.

It is thus why i have consulted with Carlos on what this group is up to against us when we are busy handling code and contributing. We agreed that the original vote call was misleading (even more now that u can look under the sheets and draw a certain argument with it against us instead of been judicial about it about our equal rights). We thus held independent elections to see if there is a 2nd opinion on a direct question instead of an ambiguous one. We are open to you to take our poll and reissue it again (limesurvey? hmm.. please no tampering of votes. Just joking :)).

Kai, the honourable chairman of ADeV skyped with me and Carlos successively pushing that we surrender to the will of the people. Ah, so sweet the call - will of the people. Where was that will when Carlos Ruiz was the chosen one? So now, the situation is remarkably opposite. They are not at fault. We are.

Look, everyone is right. URLs are community assets. But i am no criminal. If i did not book it someone else will. And i did not book all of it because i wanted community spirit to prevail and not start another regime of evil. I kindly requested (troubled both) Carlos and Trifon to hold the .com and .net respectively. But a squatter snapped up .net and he is in Germany. (You ought to go after Christian Peer rather than us because i wrote to Peer demanding his intent and he claimed it was not for squatting nor profit but love of open source community. Please write me personally and i will try to locate his email for you to commence your eager unbias need for justice and reclaiming of our community assets).

Now, coming to my very own dilemma. I been painted a criminal of evil intent to fork (by taking refuge in my old forum) and perhaps a coward with no guts to admit it. Hmm a triple count of crimes against the state. Not so fast Herr Wessel. The URL is not going anywhere until you are given the benefit to explain some of my own concerns as well. I written you privately few times and have yet to obtain any resolution to date. So i am afraid (like Carlos) have to just let it all out in the open here.

There is one valid action that the present regime can take. When there are grave questions raised against it by its significant membership, it should do what many clean administrations have done in the past including during Carlos Ruiz as PMC. Step down, return to its original charter as community open source and call for a fresh elections in a fair and transparent manner. Then we can truly see where does the community heart really lies.

I am not interfering with power after i had stepped down. I have a citizen's right to speak out when i see the project heading from good to bad.
red1
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2759
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:01 pm
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Re: Why don't i surrender adempiere.org?

Postby globalqss » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:43 am

Redhuan, unfortunately I think Adempiere is a lost cause, project fall in improper hands - the current fight is about dominating the marketing issue, and almost zero about product, code quality, or even code something! (89% of PMC work has been copying from globalqss branch, that's the main achievement they can show in 4 months of operation)

You must lose all faith on the project's future when you see the expected prosecutors behaving as "legal aid office" of the known abusers.

Firstly, I find very suspicious when the "Election Officer" (Norbert, CC, ADeV board member) break the secrecy of vote to defend the interests of ABC.
Unfortunately this "slip" will add doubt to all future Adempiere elections - it was promised to community that Limesurvey guarantees secrecy of vote - but the Election Officer decided to break such secrecy :-(

On the other hand, last two messages from Karsten (CC, ADeV, Technical Team member) strangely keep defending the ABC case because of lack of rules, but refuse to answer the direct question about WHY CC requires rules to enforce something that abuser acknowledged and promised to fix?
For me this sounds like a suspicious interpretation trying to favor ABC people from accomplishing his promise, unfulfilled during more than 289 days now.

This must be so simple for CC CC like asking ABC to respect community, and as an initial step accomplish the promise they did to community 289 days ago.
But no, CC prefer to go long way of propose rules (BTW, those will be proposed and voted by the same acknowledged abusers), vote them, and probably after that a provision will say that they cannot be applied backward. So, another fiasco is coming.

Regards,

Carlos Ruiz
globalqss
Senior
 
Posts: 599
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 4:15 am
Location: Bogotá, Colombia


Return to Rants Allowed

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron