Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Lars Marowsky-Brée 😷 (larsmb@mastodon.online)'s status on Saturday, 22-Mar-2025 03:04:18 JST Lars Marowsky-Brée 😷

   • Michael Downey 🧢
   • Bradley M. Kuhn

   Confused by the #OSI election results.

   How are @bkuhn and @downey not even in the lists? Am I misunderstanding their processes?

   • Embed this notice
     Bradley M. Kuhn (bkuhn@floss.social)'s status on Saturday, 22-Mar-2025 03:04:14 JST Bradley M. Kuhn

     in reply to

     • Open Source Initiative :osi:
     • Stefano Maffulli
     • Richard Fontana

     Stefano Maffuli (ED of OSI),

     Your argument supports #OpenSource Initiative's position on why @richardfontana and I were not appointed. It DOES NOT explain why you tampered w/ ballots to remove our names & refuse to report what the electorate recommended.

     @osi was always free to to ignore the electorate; we all know #OSI elections are advisory, not binding.

     Your refusal to engage in public dialogue w/ your electorate also indicates OSI's abilities in consensus building may be lacking.

     Cc @ed

   • Embed this notice
     Stefano Maffulli (ed@social.opensource.org)'s status on Saturday, 22-Mar-2025 03:04:15 JST Stefano Maffulli

     in reply to

     • Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange:
     • Michael Downey 🧢
     • Open Source Initiative :osi:
     • Richard Fontana
     • Bradley M. Kuhn

     @bkuhn @jwildeboer @osi @larsmb @downey The agreement you and @richardfontana signed was not the one the board sent you and, most importantly, is not the one everyone else (candidates and sitting directors) signed.
     This is my last message on the topic.

     Alfred M. Szmidt repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Bradley M. Kuhn (bkuhn@floss.social)'s status on Saturday, 22-Mar-2025 03:04:16 JST Bradley M. Kuhn

     in reply to

     • Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange:
     • Michael Downey 🧢
     • Open Source Initiative :osi:
     • Richard Fontana

     @jwildeboer

     Incorrect. Both @richardfontana and I signed a Board Agreeement with the #OpenSource Initiative and released our signed copies to the public.
     https://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2025/03/19/a-sign-board-agreement.html
     @osi proceeded to tamper with the ballots anyway.

     Cc:
     @larsmb @downey

     翠星石 likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange: (jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net)'s status on Saturday, 22-Mar-2025 03:04:18 JST Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange:

     in reply to

     • Michael Downey 🧢
     • Bradley M. Kuhn

     @larsmb They refused to sign the board agreement, as far as I understand. (UPDATE: more precise: they refused to use the tool (DocuSign) that OSI mandated) @bkuhn @downey

   • Embed this notice
     Ian Kelling (iank@hostux.social)'s status on Saturday, 22-Mar-2025 16:14:29 JST Ian Kelling

     in reply to

     • Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange:
     • Open Source Initiative :osi:
     • Stefano Maffulli
     • Bradley M. Kuhn

     @ed @bkuhn @jwildeboer @osi

     > This is my last message on the topic.

     You presumably put out this blog post https://opensource.org/blog/announcing-the-new-directors-of-osi-board which clearly suggests that 2 candidates declined to sign and now you say there was something different about what they signed, but what? You threw away my ballot and presumably many others and you aren't being straight about the reason. No, I think we need someone besides the OSI to collect the votes, because this is bullshit.

   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Sunday, 23-Mar-2025 14:55:39 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Open Source Initiative :osi:
     • Stefano Maffulli
     • Richard Fontana
     • Bradley M. Kuhn
     @bkuhn @richardfontana @osi @ed Bradley, what were you expecting from an organization specifically dedicated to serving corporate interests and convenient software (as long as it's convenient enough, proprietary software is alright)?
     
     The 3 examples you have given are not great, as whatever transportation method, whatever paper you use or whatever food you eat is not relevant to (lets say) the goal of software freedom.
     
     I'm glad you're aware that Docusign is proprietary malware and running proprietary malware is the antithesis of software freedom.
     
     But could it be that the goal of the "open source institute" is not software freedom and therefore joining it to do something other than a corporates bidding won't be very fruitful?
     
     
     Spoiler; the only reason "open source" exists, is due to how corporates get their feelings hurt if they ever notice published information about how you should use free software that respects your freedom and that proprietary software is immoral (this part really hurts their feelings, as they know they are acting immorally and don't like people realizing it).