Why do you not believe him?
Conversation
The CNCF model is one in which influence is for sale. Corporations can simply buy board memberships. This is a terrible idea for obvious reasons. The disingenuous presentation troubles me. This is not "modernization".
1
2
That hardly means that Alvaro is complicit or unbelievable. It also seems it is possible in Postgres. Buying core votes that is, as well as buying committers.
1
1
No, it doesn't. It just sounds unbelievable to me.
The current system has its problems, but it has been resistant to capture by one or two large companies - at least so far. The community never improves anything non-incrementally. Core just doesn't have that much power.
1
Well you haven't answered why you don't believe him. Have you read his foundations bylaws. He is not guaranteed any position of power in them.
1
1
I disbelieve Alvaro because his story doesn't add up. His incendiary rhetoric also makes me suspicious. I probably would have given him the benefit of the doubt if he didn't liken core to a totalitarian political group in one tweet. (see twitter.com/petervgeoghega)
Quote Tweet
Replying to @ahachete and @thinkx
It's very hard to take you seriously because you're not acknowledging any downside to what you propose, nor any upside to the status quo. The status quo certainly has its problems, but this isn't helping.
1
Peter. Enough.
You are gratuitously defaming. You have absolutely no reason for this aggressive attitude.
Keep your opinions for yourself, when they are about attacking another Community member.
I am not going to tolerate this further.
1
So you didn't compare the core team to an autocratic or despotic political movement? Please let me know how I have misrepresented you. I would be happy to correct the record if I got something wrong.
1
With all due respect Peter, I don't think Alvaro ever said anything like that.
1
1
He said: "The only wrong answer, in my opinion, is indefinite term, non elected. That has a name in politics that mostly nobody likes, for reason."
2
If would like to clarify what he actually meant by that now, I'll hear him out. What name does this thing in politics have?
twitter.com/ahachete/statu
But Peter, I didn't ask you to stop because of this. But because you were saying with no reason that my opinions are behind getting me a salary. That's not only radically false, but unfounded. You were defaming me.
Ready to let it go if you take it back.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @petervgeoghegan @dave_cramer and @ongresinc
Oligarchy: "a small group of people having control of a organization".
Do you have a better definition for a self-elected group, with unlimited term, non public meetings, self-enacted rules, which imposes opposed rules to the rest?
Not looking back; but it's time to change.
2
I said no such thing. What I actually said was this: I disbelieve your statement on having nothing to gain personally from this whole thing, materially or otherwise (you didn't specify any particular kind of gain). Separately, I *asked* you about receiving a salary.
1
Show replies