[sword-devel] CrossWire mirroring
thulester at gmail.com
Sat Jan 5 22:50:05 MST 2013
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 4:17 AM, Chris Little <chrislit at crosswire.org> wrote:
> So, Andrew, the fundamental problem here is that you seem to believe you
> are never wrong and that any disagreement is always the result of the other
> party being wrong. You believe you interpret the world correctly and that
> every other perspective is a demonstration of others' mistaken perceptions.
Chris, I am wrong often, and confess it when I am. Likewise, I take
responsibility for my mistakes. I'm simply asking how you (and Peter) feel
I've erred. For me to be wrong about something though, means there must be
something to be wrong about. To ask for clarification about one's fault is
not the same as disclaiming responsbility.
> My perspective is that you are not a rational actor. You only really seem
> to care about what you want and what you deem important, but you aren't
> particularly concerned about anything beyond the immediate term. As a
> result, your actions are unpredictable and frequently destructive. Whatever
> short-term gain you may achieve is undermined by the fact that you can't be
> trusted not to act at cross-purposes to CrossWire and a fair number of us
> perceive you as completely irrational. As a result, we can't realistically
> work with you.
Then tell me what it is you want. I've already said that with respect to
all Crosswire activities, I defer to your authority. I'll repeat that
again for the sake of being reasonable. With respect to all Crosswire
activities, I defer to your authority, completely and without argument. As
a Christian I recognize that all earthly authority is ordained in heaven.
To reiterate, the license text in the .conf, which you have admitted to
> reading, states:
> Copyrighted; Permission to distribute granted to CrossWire
> We've discussed the meaning of this with you before and that you are
> forbidden from distributing such content. You've acknowledged this before,
> yet you irrationally posted the ISV anyway.
> How does "Permission to distribute granted to CrossWire" need explanation?
> Along with "Copyrighted", that clearly identifies that you may not
> distribute, but CrossWire may.
Agreed, which is why it was removed when you asked me. So what am I
You say I should not have posted a updated module to my repo in response to
Nics request, yet I don't have 'write' access to the Crosswire FTP server.
How else would I share an update with this group? You claim this went
against the License. How did it go against the license? Is the
development of modules included, or not under Crosswire's permission to
distribute? Are module developers on this list permitted to share
copyrighted materials for the sake of development, if so, who? All? Some?
None of this is documented anywhere, yet (according to you and Peter)
somehow this is my fault - or I should have known? If you've outline this
somewhere, and I've missed it somehow - then YES - I am at fault. Direct
me to the correct URL and I will correct my defect. If not, Ill leave it
up to the community to decide who is being irrational.
Could you clarify, was I wrong to respond to Nics request, given that this
list is public, and that Nic was trying to improve a module Crosswire
already has rights on? (Or are you suggesting it was unlawful ONLY because
it was ME who made the offer? (in which case you ARE making this personal))
But you DON'T honor licenses in our modules. You ignored the license in
Um .. no. I did as you asked when you asked. I did not ignore the license
is the isv.conf, nor did I ignore your authority. Prior to that, I assumed
that module development was covered because it doesn't say anywhere that
it's not. So, as requested above, please clarify if developers of this list
are precluded from sharing copyrighted materials amongst themselves for the
purposes of module development. If not, please clarify which developers
that includes (or precludes) precisely (thus addressing the concern this
group is actually exclusive).
> We are a community, and we value the assistance of volunteers. However, we
> do not appreciate actions such as yours, which defame CrossWire and
> threaten our ability to work with copyright holders. We want people who are
> willing to work with us, not against us, and sometimes that means
> volunteers don't get to do whatever they want.
Ok. This is a public list for development purposes, and your comments show
this is somehow still personal. You've been asked to clarify whether or
not this group is exclusive or open. Notwithstanding that, a member of this
list asked about furthering an existing module already being distributed
globally. You are suggesting MY offer to assist (made publicly on the
list) was not covered under Crosswire's license (including the offer to
make a newer testable module available for testing purposes). Until you
come out honestly and say who can contribute and who cannot - *this is a
If I don't know that only a select few posses rights under CrossWire's
agreement, and then offer to help, you can accuse me of being irrational
and of disclaiming responsibility for some fault still yet to be
clarified. Look, in the interest of healing rifts, I'll assume full
responsibility for my actions, and continue to honour your authority, but
you've got to clarify whether or not development is covered under licensing
rights and if so - who.
> Does that mean CrossWire's leadership is going to dictate what volunteers
> must do? No. But it does mean we're going to dictate what volunteers must
> NOT do, if they wish to be part of the community. Your reckless, often
> illegal activities clearly mark you as someone who cannot work as part of
> this community
No offence Chris, but you and Peter have come down on me like a bag of
hammers on everything I've tried to do so far. Now you're making it
personal. I don't have a problem with your authority, taking
responsibility, or abiding by rules, and I look forward to your
clarification on who is entitled to development modules under license and
who is not.
However, I am no black sheep simply because I posted a possible update
candidate for a module currently in distribution, for the purposes of
furthering development. Similarly, I am no Judas because I did not know
this was somehow prohibited. You seem to suggest I should have known, yet
are curiously silent on why I should have known. Unsubstantiated
accusations of such personal natures go against the claim this is an open
community. It suggests hidden agendas. More concerning, they are
Therefore, I ask that you please back such accusations with something more
than bitter words. Please tell me how my response to Nics post, was
unreasonable and clarify this business about module development and
license. If I've erred, I'll repent and seek forgiveness. If you refuse to
be explicit however, I'll expect you to stop acting the false witness.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the sword-devel