[Dev] An issue that could end up with Parabola

Nicolás A. Ortega deathsbreed at themusicinnoise.net
Thu Apr 13 19:14:32 GMT 2017

Alright, this seems to be getting a little out of hand over something
that really isn't that big a deal (what's more, the past is the past and
cannot be changed)

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:33:40PM -0300, fauno wrote:
> Megver83 <megver83 at openmailbox.org> writes:
> > Hash: SHA512
> >
> > Dear Mr. Richard Stallman:
> hi richard, i'm really ashamed you're getting involved in this and the
> shitload of emails that'll ensue.  if you take the time to read the fine
> selection sent, at least hear the other bell and the full story.
> > 	In the last past days (even some years), the Parabola community
> > experimented some issues among its members because of the difference
> > of ideas. The problem now is that these issues have increased and now
> > it has become a big problem, which could end up with Parabola if we
> > don't solve it soon. We are telling *you* this because the Parabola
> > Community has been divided, and we need a moderator, so we chose you.
> this "we" doesn't mean the parabola community, just the guys feeling
> attacked.

Why do we need to involve Richard in this? I feel like this is somehow a
plea to authority trying to have someone else solve our problems.
However, I don't think this will solve anything, what's more it creates
an authority figure in the Parabola community where instead we should be
speaking rationally. We can't expect others to come in and solve our
problems for us.

Differing opinions is normal since we are all different people (life
would be pretty boring if we all had the same opinions). The important
thing is reasoning through our differing opinions and finding a
compromise (which may or may not be necessary if either side is able to
convince the other of their ideas).

> > 	Some time ago *some* Parabola devs thought about creating a webstore
> > so that devs can work full time for Parabola and get a salary for
> > that, at that point it was just like the "brainstorming" when they
> > (we) made some virtual meetings. When this idea became a bit more
> > known, then other devs, which were not invited nor involved at the
> > beginning started to criticize the ones who begun with the idea
> > calling our meetings "secret meetings", "meetings without
> > transparency" and bullying some other devs like André Silva
> > (Emulatorman), insulting and contradicting him, defending themselves
> > attacking others.
> yes, they were secret because everyone else in the community wasn't
> involved.  you're forgetting you also wanted to force our fiscal sponsor
> to pay for things you wanted without caring if they could really pay
> them, and then accusing them of mishandling our funds.  this forced them
> to cut our agreement and everyone else here to find a new fiscal
> sponsor.

From what I know (correct me if I'm wrong) although these ideas were
discussed in private they were never implemented nor is there currently
a plan to implement them. Therefore, what is their sin? I don't think
that discussing ideas (or even elaborating them) in private is a bad
thing. Now, if they would like to implement any of these then it should
be up to the community as a whole where the community is concerned. That
is, actions should be transparent, but ideas can be private since they
have no real effect until they are put into action.

I do see, however, the issue with fiscal policy of Parabola. My personal
suggestion is that since Parabola aims to be a community oriented
project (afaik) I suggest full transparency. This is something I've done
while taking part in a local political party that aimed to be directly
democratic and it worked rather well, as it functions as a trustless
system where even if you do not trust the person in charge of finances
you can keep an eye on their activities with respect to finances. This
forces said person to also be more cautious about how they handle
things and allows for anyone to publicly bring up any issues that they
see with how things are being handled and for them to be discussed by
the community as a whole. For this it would be wise to put a link to a
GnuCash file on the Parabola website where one can easily find this

> > 	It is not necessary to say names, we have collected evidence so we
> > can prove what I'm saying is true. Please read the attachment, there
> > are the names and emails they've sent to the mailing list.
> this is a bogus claim.  your corpus is full of names of people that have
> called your bullshit.
> > 	After all of this, André Silva left the decision of his expulsion to
> > the community[1], and many devs and users are on his favor. So we ask
> /devs and users/his friends/

I am not his friend, I know Emulatorman very little, however from the
little I have known him, I have seen him doing quite a bit of work for
this project, and that he is a very valuable person for this community.

> > you, please, help us with a wise suggestion or with the decision you
> > consider correct and propose it to the community. From my personal
> > point of view, I think a disclaimer or sth. similar (code of conduct,
> > community rules, etc) has to be created, there is none afaik, perhaps
> > that's sth. you can recommend?.
> we do have community rules: we have an open list and everything was
> always brought here to consensus.

When it comes to community rules I am always very cautious and
skeptical, as they tend to have the opposite effect that they are aiming
for (especially Codes of Conduct). Policy is one thing, but the
behaviour of each individual is something completely separate and (as I
see it) non-related.

Nicolás A. Ortega (Deathsbreed)
Public PGP Key:
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170413/41fe7d1d/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list