Home » General (non-technical) » Eclipse Foundation » [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums
|
| Re: [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums [message #9876 is a reply to message #9828] |
Tue, 11 January 2005 03:57   |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: none.none.org
Ok, that's enough.
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls and all that, but as M. Lazaridis seems
so eager to communicate, I think it's time to spread the following URL,
which gives what seems to be a reliable idea of who our beloved
troublemaker is:
http://www.fh-joanneum.ac.at/ima/source/StudentenAlleUebersi cht.asp?jahr=2000&lan=EN
Basicaly, when Ilias is saying
(http://www.lazaridis.com/resumes/lazaridis.html) that he has been
"Solving Technical Problems Abstractly" for 20 years, and for 18 years in
"IT Business", and given the nice picture available in the first url,
Ilias has started his career at best at the age of 10 (in the best of all
cases, in my opinion something closer to 5).
He has abuse this newsgroup and others so many times that someone should
give him a reward. He evaluates, investigates, comments and advises more
than a old, senior, ancestral consultant, yet his resume looks like it's a
teenage one.
I would never have the guts to suggest half what he has affirmed, and
that's with now 6 years working (i.e. in a company, and paid for) with
Java, Oracle, and every piece of hardware required to operate such
technologies.
Ilias, give yourself a favor: stop believing your experienced enough to be
a consultant, and got get some real experience. Then come back in 5 years,
and I promise that I, for one, will be willing to hear what you have to
say.
And in the mean time, stop wasting the time of perfectly capable people.
Thanks.
|
|
| | | | |
| Re: [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums [message #10082 is a reply to message #10059] |
Thu, 13 January 2005 05:42 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ilias.lazaridis.com
[using the html-news-gateway, as nntp r/w-access blocked]
Eric Clayberg wrote:
> "Ross Gardler" <rgardler@come_now_no_spam-apache.org> wrote in message
> news:cs4i9b$fc6$1@www.eclipse.org...
>>
>> Something is very wrong with this whole situation.
> The only thing "wrong" is believing anything that Ilias has to say.
The Eclipse Foundation itself has done this - and has reacted to several
suggestions of me.
-
Some intresting saying of "Eric Clayberg" and "Ilias Lazaridis" (me)
[The "wrong time, wrong place" has gotten shortly a very sad example]
Re: Overtaker of Eclipse Foundation Inc. possible?
http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/article.php?id=148&gro up=eclipse.foundation
>> The fact of the matter is that Ilias has been "censored"
> Given that Ilias continues to post his nonsense here, it does not appear
> that he has been censored in anyway.
> I certainly wouldn't take his word for it.
I write over the html-nntp-gateway, which is very inconvenient (and was
disabled for around 24h, too).
My access to the nntp-server is blocked.
[Mr. Tim Boudreau (Sun, NetBeans Board Member) had at least the courage to
clearly and publically admit his censorship actions on the netBeans forum
(when the discussion "NetBeans is not Open Source" started)].
What about Mr. Mike Milinkovich (Eclipse Foundation Director) and Mr.
Denis Roy (Eclipse Webmaster)? Have they regret the censorship, thus they
keep the backdoor open?
Or will they admit that my nntp access to the eclipse newsserver (Read and
Write) is blocked?
>> he can now publish his story anywhere he wants without fear of reprisal.
> No one is likely to listen him anywhere else given his track record.
You will soon realize the scope of your (and the eclipse foundations)
false rating.
I'm a little sad about the community.
But as they mostly do not act against clear censorship (newsgroup) and
abuse of power (bugzilla), they deserve the negative publicity they will
get.
>> The community is the strength of Open Source software development ask for
>> the communities support *before* taking such drastic action.
> Given that Ilias has already been shut out of most of the on-line
> communities he has polluted
Fact: "most of the on-line communities"
Source: "Eric Clayberg (Instantiations)"
[NETBEANS] [CENSORSHIP] [Fwd: Returned post for nbusers@netbeans.org]
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.softwaret ools/msg/6ae81d9ae5fac267
[HIBERNATE] [EVALUATION] - Gavin King Censors Hibernate Forum
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.softwaret ools/msg/5c56e6092610fdd6
[ECLIPSE] [CENSORSHIP] - Mike Milinkovich (Eclipse Foundation Director)
Censors Forums
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.softwaret ools/msg/ff9ba79be816921d
> and given the overwhelming distaste that most
"overhelming distaste"
a few weak personalities have applauded to the censorship.
thousands of readers silently watch.
They don't talk, as they are captured by the IBM sponsoring machine.
> Eclipse newsgroup participants have expressed for his behavior, I imagine
> that the folks at eclipse.org would have broad community support for
> anything they wanted to do.
"I imagine"
imagination is not enouth to confirm ["broad community support"].
-
And:
even if 100% of the community agree.
If it is censorship, it remains censorship.
[Shutting down criticism & suggestions, which is placed in the valid
channels]
> -Eric
..
--
http://lazaridis.com
|
|
| | | |
| Re: [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums [message #10182 is a reply to message #10151] |
Thu, 13 January 2005 09:37 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
"Ross Gardler" <rgardler@come_now_no_spam-apache.org> wrote in message
news:cs5u7s$731$1@www.eclipse.org...
>
> It may not be a requirement of the Eclipse Foundation that such a vote
> needs to be taken, I am simply wonder (aloud) if it should be. However the
> discussion is not being had since people are still focusing on a single
> individual rather than the process for dealing with such individuals.
Actually, I don't really care whether Ilias posts here or not. When it comes
to the newsgroups, he has devolved into nothing more than harmless theater
at this point. What I do object to - and what I think justifies any action
the Eclipse.org administrators want to take - is his repeated attempts to
hijack and corrupt the Eclipse Bugzilla system. That went way over the line.
He was warned repeatedly to stop and continued anyway.
I expect the Eclipse Foundation and its administrators to protect the
resources of the foundation. If someone tries to come in and hack or
otherwise corrupt one of its major systems (like Bugzilla), I don't think a
vote of the community is necessary or warranted. Swift action on the part of
the admins is necessary and required to protect those systems for the rest
of the community. If he has, in fact, been blocked from accessing specific
eclipse.org resources (Bugzilla, newsgroups, etc.), he has no one to blame
but himself.
-Eric
|
|
| |
| Re: [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums [message #10200 is a reply to message #10182] |
Thu, 13 January 2005 10:06 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: rgardler.come_now_no_spam-apache.org
Eric Clayberg wrote:
> "Ross Gardler" <rgardler@come_now_no_spam-apache.org> wrote in message
> news:cs5u7s$731$1@www.eclipse.org...
>
>>It may not be a requirement of the Eclipse Foundation that such a vote
>>needs to be taken, I am simply wonder (aloud) if it should be. However the
>>discussion is not being had since people are still focusing on a single
>>individual rather than the process for dealing with such individuals.
>
>
> Actually, I don't really care whether Ilias posts here or not. When it comes
> to the newsgroups, he has devolved into nothing more than harmless theater
> at this point. What I do object to - and what I think justifies any action
> the Eclipse.org administrators want to take - is his repeated attempts to
> hijack and corrupt the Eclipse Bugzilla system. That went way over the line.
> He was warned repeatedly to stop and continued anyway.
>
> I expect the Eclipse Foundation and its administrators to protect the
> resources of the foundation. If someone tries to come in and hack or
> otherwise corrupt one of its major systems (like Bugzilla), I don't think a
> vote of the community is necessary or warranted. Swift action on the part of
> the admins is necessary and required to protect those systems for the rest
> of the community. If he has, in fact, been blocked from accessing specific
> eclipse.org resources (Bugzilla, newsgroups, etc.), he has no one to blame
> but himself.
Now you are getting silly, that is not the scenario I am trying to
discuss, this was not an emergency situation.
To protect the community the Eclipse Foundation must be certain that it
is acting on behalf of the community. Since nobody asked the community
what the majority consenus was there was no opportunity to ensure that
this was the correct action. I again remind you that I have not stated
whether I agree with the action in this case or not, that is not the
point, the point is we (the community) were not asked, as a result it is
possible that a portion of the community feels misrepresented (and I am
not referring to the individual involved, I am referring to the
community as a whole).
Oh well, I said my bit maybe someone heard.
Ross
|
|
|
| Re: [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums [message #10227 is a reply to message #10192] |
Thu, 13 January 2005 10:21 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: rgardler.come_now_no_spam-apache.org
ilias wrote:
> [they possibly keep silence - but they get the picture about the IBM
> tyranny within the Eclipse Foundation, which does not resist to use
> censorship as control method. ]
I wish to make something 100% clear that my suggestion that there is a
need for a more formal way of dealing with "trolls" does not in any way
imply that that I support any of the views of Ilias, especially the one
quoted above.
In my opinion IBM have nothing to do with Censorship here or anywhere
else in the world of Open Source.
For the record, I am not now, nor have I ever been an IBM employee. In
fact I have never worked for a software company, only ever for myself
and, for a short time the University of the West Indies.
My experience of IBM is very different from that stated above. I have
been the recipient of an IBM award. An award that was provided with no
restrictions on how I use it and that carried no control on reporting.
In fact, they didn't even require me to write project reports for IBM
themselves. It is true that IBM hope that I will sing the praises of
Eclipse and that I will develop software that can be used in IBM
products, but it is still Open Source and anyone, even Ilias, can use it
without restriction.
Ilias, you should be aware that in most countries a statement such as
that quoted above, without adequate evidence to back it up, could land
you in court (if IBM were so inclined, which I am sure they are not).
Now, having distanced myself from these comments I will butt out again -
so Ilias, please don't try and draw me into an argument about this.
Ross
|
|
| |
| Re: [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums [message #10319 is a reply to message #10287] |
Thu, 13 January 2005 14:46 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: gwatson.lanl.gov
I, for one, have no issue with the proposed action, whether or not the
action was actually taken. It seems a reasonable response, if somewhat
ineffective.
In relation to whether Mike should have consulted the community before
doing so, I see no reason that he should have. The Eclipse Foundation,
which operates the news server, is an incorporated body that is managed
by a board of directors. Mike, as executive director, is responsible
only to the board, and has the authority to manage the day-to-day
affairs of the Foundation. Clearly the operation of a news server falls
into this category.
One might argue that Mike should have consulted the membership of the
organization, or at the very least, the board of directors. However,
this is entirely a matter for the board to decide. As a representative
of the community, which has no standing in the organization at all, I
have absolutely no involvement (nor expectation of involvement) in
decisions of this nature.
Greg
Jared Burns wrote:
> FYI, the Eclipse.org organization publicly announced (on this newsgroup)
> that Ilias' rights were being revoked. It's just a shame that it wasn't
> done sooner (and more effectively).
>
> - Jared
>
> Eric Clayberg wrote:
>
>> Actually, you missed my point...there is no evidence that *any* action
>> was taken against him other than *his* statements (and those have zero
>> credibility). The simple fact that he continues to post here under the
>> *same* username directly contradicts those statements. Maybe he simply
>> got tired of being ignored and decided to shout "censorship" instead
>> (it wouldn't be the first time).
|
|
|
| Re: [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums [message #10351 is a reply to message #10319] |
Thu, 13 January 2005 15:31 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: rgardler.come_now_no_spam-apache.org
Greg Watson wrote:
> One might argue that Mike should have consulted the membership of the
> organization, or at the very least, the board of directors. However,
> this is entirely a matter for the board to decide. As a representative
> of the community, which has no standing in the organization at all, I
> have absolutely no involvement (nor expectation of involvement) in
> decisions of this nature.
You are correct, it is a matter for the Board to decide. It is not my
intention to imply that the Board should be governed by a vote in the
community. Only that a vote in the community would add support to the
Boards actions. This support can be used when defending any claims of
"tyranny" (for example).
Community voting is a simple technique used in other incorporated open
source foundations (Apache being the most prominent). It works very well
in resolving issues such as these.
It works well since the Board members have veto votes, thus their
authority is not diluted. The average community member (like me) just
has a vote with which to express their opinion on important issues
without getting drawn into a petty argument, a simple yes or no in
response to a call for a vote is sufficient. In cases like this most
people keep quiet for fear of being drawn in. The problem is that
sometimes the board may misjudge the mood of the silent majority.
I hope it is understood that I am not saying there is anything *wrong*
with the Board of Eclipse Foundation, or with their actions in this
case. I am simply wondering if there is a better, more robust and more
transparent way of handling these situations.
In this case I do not think the outcome would have been any different,
but I do believe that having seen the opinion of the community the
individual involved would not have been able to say things like:
"[they possibly keep silence - but they get the picture about the IBM
tyranny within the Eclipse Foundation, which does not resist to use
censorship as control method. ]"
(from news://news.eclipse.org:119/cs61jh$ksr$1@www.eclipse.org )
The way things stand there is no way of showing this statement to be
correct or incorrect and so it makes great content for a blog or article
intended to show weaknesses in the Eclipse community. With a community
vote this same sentence becomes a show of unity in the community since I
feel very confident the *vast* majority would disagree with this
sentence together with the many other accusations and actions that led
to this individual being "censored".
Ross
|
|
|
| Re: [GOVERNANCE] [CENSORSHIP] - Act Against Censorship on Eclipse Forums [message #10712 is a reply to message #10200] |
Fri, 14 January 2005 07:43 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: joerg.von.frantzius.artnology.nospam.com
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Ross Gardler schrieb:
<blockquote cite="midcs62ph$pqh$1@www.eclipse.org" type="cite">Eric
Clayberg wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">"Ross Gardler"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:rgardler@come_now_no_spam-apache.org"><rgardler@come_now_no_spam-apache.org></a> wrote in message
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="news:cs5u7s$731$1@www.eclipse.org">news:cs5u7s$731$1@www.eclipse.org</a>...
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">It may not be a requirement of the Eclipse
Foundation that such a vote needs to be taken, I am simply wonder
(aloud) if it should be. However the discussion is not being had since
people are still focusing on a single individual rather than the
process for dealing with such individuals.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Actually, I don't really care whether Ilias posts here or not. When it
comes to the newsgroups, he has devolved into nothing more than
harmless theater at this point. What I do object to - and what I think
justifies any action the Eclipse.org administrators want to take - is
his repeated attempts to hijack and corrupt the Eclipse Bugzilla
system. That went way over the line. He was warned repeatedly to stop
and continued anyway.
<br>
<br>
I expect the Eclipse Foundation and its administrators to protect the
resources of the foundation. If someone tries to come in and hack or
otherwise corrupt one of its major systems (like Bugzilla), I don't
think a vote of the community is necessary or warranted. Swift action
on the part of the admins is necessary and required to protect those
systems for the rest of the community. If he has, in fact, been blocked
from accessing specific eclipse.org resources (Bugzilla, newsgroups,
etc.), he has no one to blame but himself.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Now you are getting silly, that is not the scenario I am trying to
discuss, this was not an emergency situation.
<br>
<br>
To protect the community the Eclipse Foundation must be certain that it
is acting on behalf of the community. Since nobody asked the community
what the majority consenus was there was no opportunity to ensure that
this was the correct action. I again remind you that I have not stated
whether I agree with the action in this case or not, that is not the
point, the point is we (the community) were not asked, as a result it
is possible that a portion of the community feels misrepresented (and I
am not referring to the individual involved, I am referring to the
community as a whole).
<br>
<br>
Oh well, I said my bit maybe someone heard.
<br>
</blockquote>
I'd agree that it is surely in the interest of the community that
developers are not blocked by having to clean up behind someone running
amok in the bugzilla, you might call it sabotage. Unfortunately, I
think it was simply technically not possible to block him from bugzilla
without blocking him from the newsgroups. <br>
<br>
In fact, he actually even *isn't* blocked from the newsgroups, as you
can see by his various post. In the end we have:<br>
<ol>
<li>developers can continue developing</li>
<li>ilias can continue to publicize his mental confusion<br>
</li>
</ol>
Everybody should be happy.<br>
</body>
</html>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 08 17:22:02 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.07452 seconds |
Home