Code of Conduct: Those Ejected should rescind their license grant.

Code of Conduct: Those Ejected should rescind their license grant.

[unconditionedwitness]

The grant is not supported by consideration.
It dispenses only largess, and asks for no recompense.
It is a bare license.
Thus it can be revoked by the grantor at any time.
His act of grace bestowed, and his act of propriety can rescind.

The free software world is held up muchly by a gentleman's agreement.
The agreement is that we shall take mutually beneficial actions, vis a 
vis the field of software engineering, to increase the net freedom 
available to all .

It is not so much held up by law, regardless of what the lay programmers 
and users of programmers would imagine to believe.

To turn one's contributions around as a weapon against the contributor:
to tell him he must not say this or that, he must not act this or that 
way,
lest he be barred from his hobby; let he be barred from freely giving
dispensation, is an abhorrent abuse of his magnanimity

Now this gentleman's agreement is being, or has been shattered.
You will find that the law has no supports to bind him;
but many to fell the ungrateful who saw themselves the inviolate 
annuitants of his altruism.

Bare licenses are revocable at will. They always have been.
Those who are thrown out of the "Linux Kernel Community" in punishment 
for not obeying this CoC, who's past contributions count for nothing in 
the face of those who will throughout the ages to control men in all 
things; for not "behaving properly" here or there, within their public 
or private life; for not bending the knee to the Anglo-American 
religion, should absolutely recind the grant they have dispensed.
They are well within their rights to do so, and hostile action must be 
met with the same and worse in response.




On 2018-09-19 17:09, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:33:58 +0000
> observerofaffairs@redchan.it wrote:
> 
>> The CoC will lead only to infighting amongst the contributors, with
>> this new weapon wielded firmly in all participants hands.
> 
> You've made your point. Now stop it. The remedies you suggest, if they
> could even be legally done, would hobble the Linux Kernel project, to
> the great delight of Google, Microsoft and Apple. Long observation of
> people resenting CoCs  is they want the right to speak cruelly to
> individuals and speak cruelly about groups of people, those groups
> having nothing to do with the list's core foundation (Linux sans
> systemd, in our case). The person continuing to use terminology, having
> nothing to do with the core foundation of the mailing list, that others
> ask them not to use, has a real problem, and it's not the list's duty
> to help with that problem. The project is probably better off without
> the person --- his or her priorities are just plain wrong.
> 
> Your posts are offtopic. You've made your point. Please stop now.
> 
> SteveT
> 
> Steve Litt
> September 2018 featured book: Quit Joblessness: Start Your Own Business
> http://www.troubleshooters.com/startbiz
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@lists.dyne.org
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Code of Conduct: Those Ejected should rescind their license grant.

[unconditionedwitness]

The grant is not supported by consideration.
It dispenses only largess, and asks for no recompense.
It is a bare license.
Thus it can be revoked by the grantor at any time.
His act of grace bestowed, and his act of propriety can rescind.

The free software world is held up muchly by a gentleman's agreement.
The agreement is that we shall take mutually beneficial actions, vis a 
vis the field of software engineering, to increase the net freedom 
available to all.

It is not so much held up by law, regardless of what the lay programmers 
and users of programmers would imagine to believe.

To turn one's contributions around as a weapon against the contributor:
to tell him he must not say this or that, he must not act this or that 
way,
lest he be barred from his hobby; let he be barred from freely giving
dispensation, is an abhorrent abuse of his magnanimity

Now this gentleman's agreement is being, or has been shattered.
You will find that the law has no supports to bind him;
but many to fell the ungrateful who saw themselves the inviolate 
annuitants of his altruism.

Bare licenses are revocable at will. They always have been.
Those who are thrown out of the "Linux Kernel Community" in punishment 
for not obeying this CoC, who's past contributions count for nothing in 
the face of those who will throughout the ages to control men in all 
things; for not "behaving properly" here or there, within their public 
or private life; for not bending the knee to the Anglo-American 
religion, should absolutely recind the grant they have dispensed.
They are well within their rights to do so, and hostile action must be 
met with the same and worse in response.

Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: [DNG] GPL version 2 is a bare license. Recind. (Regarding (future) linux Code of Conduct Bannings).

[observerofaffairs]

The CoC will lead only to infighting amongst the contributors, with this 
new weapon wielded firmly in all participants hands.

It is another example of "looking the gift horse in the mouth"
(Linus telling everyone to [fsck] off is the previous example]
and will only be tolerated by the hirelings. The community contributors 
will fade away and the complete corporate takeover of the kernel will be 
complete.

Linux will suffer the same fate as the FreeBSD team (who have lost half 
their contributors), additionally morally-questionable code (ie: code 
that befits content owners over the user, code that benefits the 
security interests of the states over the user, etc) will be folded into 
the kernel with a smile.

While you are correct regarding most free-software and open-culture 
licenses, which often include a no-rescission clause, or are stylized as 
a contract (giving rise to a possible interest defense), it does not 
apply to version 2 of the GPL specifically (remeber: Linus rejected the 
any-later-version codicil, thus any license improvements are out of 
reach regarding the kernel, and v3 has very important improvements). 
Version 2 of the GPL creates no contractual interests, nor does it 
contain language that would give clear indication to the grantee that 
his license will never be revoked by the property owner (who has an 
absolute right to revoke grants at will, where there is no interest 
attached to the grant etc).

The Free Software movement is, and will continue to be decimated by this 
industry-wide advance for the next 5 years at-least, as project after 
project falls to classic divide and conquer techniques that date to 
before the Roman empire. Programmers, though brilliant in their specific 
field, tend to be ignorant of even basic human management practice - and 
resistant to learn.


On 2018-09-19 08:43, Bruce Perens wrote:
> I concur with Richard. Everything I know about the license tells me it
> can not be rescinded or withdrawn. It can only be terminated for
> infringement.
> 
> I understand that codes of conduct added to the group long after your
> first participation are frustrating for some, and may even seem
> draconian. I see the need for them, and suggest you consider the views
> of others.
> 
> If you have no alternative, the license allows you to fork the project
> and make your own conduct rules.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bruce
> 
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 5:38 AM Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
>> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider
>> ]]]
>> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,
>> ]]]
>> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example.
>> ]]]
>> 
>>> One is rescission of the license they granted regarding their
>> code, and
>>> then a lawsuit under copyright if/when the rescission is
>> ignored.
>>> The others are breach of contract, libel, false light, etc.
>> 
>> If "rescission" is really a possibility, it would cause greast
>> trouble
>> for the free software community.  We would need to take steps to
>> make
>> sure it cannot happen.
>> 
>> However, that goes against everything I have been told by others.
>> 
>> --
>> Dr Richard Stallman
>> President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org,
>> https://fsf.org)
>> Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Code of Conduct: Those Ejected should rescind their license grant.

[observerofaffairs]

The grant is not supported by consideration.
It dispenses only largess, and asks for no recompense.
It is a bare license.
Thus it can be revoked by the grantor at any time.
His act of grace bestowed, and his act of propriety can rescind.

The free software world is held up muchly by a gentleman's agreement.
The agreement is that we shall take mutually beneficial actions, vis a 
vis the field of software engineering, to increase the net freedom 
available to all.

It is not so much held up by law, regardless of what the lay programmers 
and users of programmers would imagine to believe.

To turn one's contributions around as a weapon against the contributor:
to tell him he must not say this or that, he must not act this or that 
way,
lest he be barred from his hobby; let he be barred from freely giving
dispensation, is an abhorrent abuse of his magnanimity

Now this gentleman's agreement is being, or has been shattered.
You will find that the law has no supports to bind him;
but many to fell the ungrateful who saw themselves the inviolate 
annuitants of his altruism.

Bare licenses are revocable at will. They always have been.
Those who are thrown out of the "Linux Kernel Community" in punishment 
for not obeying this CoC, who's past contributions count for nothing in 
the face of those who will throughout the ages to control men in all 
things; for not "behaving properly" here or there, within their public 
or private life; for not bending the knee to the Anglo-American 
religion, should absolutely recind the grant they have dispensed.
They are well within their rights to do so, and hostile action must be 
met with the same and worse in response.



On 2018-09-19 17:09, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:33:58 +0000
> observerofaffairs@redchan.it wrote:
> 
>> The CoC will lead only to infighting amongst the contributors, with
>> this new weapon wielded firmly in all participants hands.
> 
> You've made your point. Now stop it. The remedies you suggest, if they
> could even be legally done, would hobble the Linux Kernel project, to
> the great delight of Google, Microsoft and Apple. Long observation of
> people resenting CoCs  is they want the right to speak cruelly to
> individuals and speak cruelly about groups of people, those groups
> having nothing to do with the list's core foundation (Linux sans
> systemd, in our case). The person continuing to use terminology, having
> nothing to do with the core foundation of the mailing list, that others
> ask them not to use, has a real problem, and it's not the list's duty
> to help with that problem. The project is probably better off without
> the person --- his or her priorities are just plain wrong.
> 
> Your posts are offtopic. You've made your point. Please stop now.
> 
> SteveT
> 
> Steve Litt
> September 2018 featured book: Quit Joblessness: Start Your Own Business
> http://www.troubleshooters.com/startbiz
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@lists.dyne.org
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng