Antoine Riard [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2023-05-10 🗒️ Summary of this message: Bitcoin ...
📅 Original date posted:2023-05-10
🗒️ Summary of this message: Bitcoin developer defends his right to expose potential conflicts of interest in open-source development and calls for protection of communication channels.
📝 Original message:
Hi Tony,
> Is there a better place to have public communication? Unfortunately since
one off topic email was sent here, it's been a ghost town. It appears that
there's many emails being held and only one moderator that checks them once
a week.
As I think you're referring to my post of March 21th and as the author of
this post, I'll politely refuse the qualification of "off-topic". I had and
I still have the concerns of "frivolous legal claims" being used between
bitcoin developers/organizations provoking a distortion of the neutrality
of the development and a chilling effect of the technical discussions (i.e
code we compile and spec we implement). For those reasons, it was my legal
right and moral duty to inform the community of what is happening between
Chaincode and myself. And here I'm following the recommendation of one of
the moderators of the Lightning mailing list himself "If this worries you
too, let's make sure we keep each other honest, OK?" [0].
When you think a group of people with open-source responsibilities are in a
situation of conflict of interests or "moral hazards", or even the
appearance of them, you have the right to expose the wrongdoing, including
the _proportional_ revelation of private elements. People have done the
"free choice" to conduct a career in open-source, for some even declaring
in some context to maintain integrity and accept their actions to be
submitted to external accountability [1]. While the exposure of private
elements of public personalities might break common courtesy, it's a
morally valid practice if you're familiar with the public institutions of
US and Europe, and I think this practice has found validity in the history
of open-source commons or IETF's protocol development [1].
Beyond, the Bitcoin and Lightning development communication channels
constitute a public forum, where by nature the participants are exchanging
ideas and defending competing interests. In consequence, the participants'
rights and capabilities to contribute and speak their minds in those
communication channels should be protected. Those communication channels
are not your usual corporate workplace, and in case of conflicting
principles, the maintainers of those communication channels should ensure a
balance of rights and a proportionality in any restraining measure.
And this new post is not to exonerate myself of any legal responsibility
for personal matters that could be recognized as the outcome of a judicial
process, respective of both rights of the accusation and rights of the
defense. Rather to enlighten the Bitcoin community that the formal
separation between private matters and open-source responsibilities, and
the adequate check-and-balances to guarantee this separation is somehow
what are the underlying stakes for this feud between Chaincode and myself,
from my perspective. I can say missing an open-source engineering meeting
or being revoked a few Github permissions matters far less than the clear
affirmation and respect of the freedom of expression, the presumption of
innocence and due process in the Bitcoin common space, all proportions
conserved.
I don't blame any party involved in this issue, nor assign "bad
intentions''. One position is really a function of your life experiences,
knowledge of the legal and cultural framework and access to the factual
elements. As all human conflicts it is not binary rather "grey". People can
be top executives at a billion-dollar company, having successful ventures
with hundreds of folks under management, or have a lot of responsibilities
for their relative young age, and still disagree on the set of legal and
moral principles to apply in the present case.
Finally, thanks to the Bitcoin friends who have reached out to call for
level-headedness and cool-mindness in the public discussion of this complex
topic. Like I said to them, in the lack of more suspected wrongdoing from
the other side, I won't communicate further on this subject on the Bitcoin
and Lightning technical channels. However I still firmly believe the
discussion on the principles, abstract in the maximum from its private
elements, should still be pursued on other channels. Independently, there
is a legal channel opened between Chaincode and myself and good progress is
made to find a serene and long-standing resolution to this issue.
Best,
Antoine
[0]
https://rusty-lightning.medium.com/the-corrosion-of-ethics-in-cryptocurrencies-f7ba77e9dfc3
[1]
https://github.com/btrustteam/board-book/blob/main/vision/genesis_principles.md
[2]
https://www.ietf.org/about/administration/policies-procedures/conflict-interest/
Le lun. 8 mai 2023 à 21:26, Tony Giorgio via Lightning-dev <
lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> a écrit :
> Is there a better place to have public communication? Unfortunately since
> one off topic email was sent here, it's been a ghost town. It appears that
> there's many emails being held and only one moderator that checks them once
> a week.
>
> Would hate to see this list die but wondering if there's a better place
> for discussions?
>
> Tony
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> On Apr 29, 2023, 9:57 PM, niftynei < niftynei at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> When I joined the lightning community a few years ago, I was relatively
> new to open source software and specification work. Rusty really impressed
> on me on the importance of holding conversations, as much as possible in
> public.
>
> Practically speaking, this encompasses IRC, this mailing list, and github
> issues/PRs.
>
> The reason for this is twofold. It helps document the range of options
> considered for technical decisions and it provides an interface point for
> new participants to contribute to the discussion.
>
> Given some recent mails that were posted to this list, now seems like a
> good time to reiterate the importance and preference of public
> communication whenever possible, especially for specification or technical
> discussions.
>
>
> ~ nifty
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lightning-dev mailing list
> Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230510/1f0f9268/attachment.html>;
🗒️ Summary of this message: Bitcoin developer defends his right to expose potential conflicts of interest in open-source development and calls for protection of communication channels.
📝 Original message:
Hi Tony,
> Is there a better place to have public communication? Unfortunately since
one off topic email was sent here, it's been a ghost town. It appears that
there's many emails being held and only one moderator that checks them once
a week.
As I think you're referring to my post of March 21th and as the author of
this post, I'll politely refuse the qualification of "off-topic". I had and
I still have the concerns of "frivolous legal claims" being used between
bitcoin developers/organizations provoking a distortion of the neutrality
of the development and a chilling effect of the technical discussions (i.e
code we compile and spec we implement). For those reasons, it was my legal
right and moral duty to inform the community of what is happening between
Chaincode and myself. And here I'm following the recommendation of one of
the moderators of the Lightning mailing list himself "If this worries you
too, let's make sure we keep each other honest, OK?" [0].
When you think a group of people with open-source responsibilities are in a
situation of conflict of interests or "moral hazards", or even the
appearance of them, you have the right to expose the wrongdoing, including
the _proportional_ revelation of private elements. People have done the
"free choice" to conduct a career in open-source, for some even declaring
in some context to maintain integrity and accept their actions to be
submitted to external accountability [1]. While the exposure of private
elements of public personalities might break common courtesy, it's a
morally valid practice if you're familiar with the public institutions of
US and Europe, and I think this practice has found validity in the history
of open-source commons or IETF's protocol development [1].
Beyond, the Bitcoin and Lightning development communication channels
constitute a public forum, where by nature the participants are exchanging
ideas and defending competing interests. In consequence, the participants'
rights and capabilities to contribute and speak their minds in those
communication channels should be protected. Those communication channels
are not your usual corporate workplace, and in case of conflicting
principles, the maintainers of those communication channels should ensure a
balance of rights and a proportionality in any restraining measure.
And this new post is not to exonerate myself of any legal responsibility
for personal matters that could be recognized as the outcome of a judicial
process, respective of both rights of the accusation and rights of the
defense. Rather to enlighten the Bitcoin community that the formal
separation between private matters and open-source responsibilities, and
the adequate check-and-balances to guarantee this separation is somehow
what are the underlying stakes for this feud between Chaincode and myself,
from my perspective. I can say missing an open-source engineering meeting
or being revoked a few Github permissions matters far less than the clear
affirmation and respect of the freedom of expression, the presumption of
innocence and due process in the Bitcoin common space, all proportions
conserved.
I don't blame any party involved in this issue, nor assign "bad
intentions''. One position is really a function of your life experiences,
knowledge of the legal and cultural framework and access to the factual
elements. As all human conflicts it is not binary rather "grey". People can
be top executives at a billion-dollar company, having successful ventures
with hundreds of folks under management, or have a lot of responsibilities
for their relative young age, and still disagree on the set of legal and
moral principles to apply in the present case.
Finally, thanks to the Bitcoin friends who have reached out to call for
level-headedness and cool-mindness in the public discussion of this complex
topic. Like I said to them, in the lack of more suspected wrongdoing from
the other side, I won't communicate further on this subject on the Bitcoin
and Lightning technical channels. However I still firmly believe the
discussion on the principles, abstract in the maximum from its private
elements, should still be pursued on other channels. Independently, there
is a legal channel opened between Chaincode and myself and good progress is
made to find a serene and long-standing resolution to this issue.
Best,
Antoine
[0]
https://rusty-lightning.medium.com/the-corrosion-of-ethics-in-cryptocurrencies-f7ba77e9dfc3
[1]
https://github.com/btrustteam/board-book/blob/main/vision/genesis_principles.md
[2]
https://www.ietf.org/about/administration/policies-procedures/conflict-interest/
Le lun. 8 mai 2023 à 21:26, Tony Giorgio via Lightning-dev <
lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> a écrit :
> Is there a better place to have public communication? Unfortunately since
> one off topic email was sent here, it's been a ghost town. It appears that
> there's many emails being held and only one moderator that checks them once
> a week.
>
> Would hate to see this list die but wondering if there's a better place
> for discussions?
>
> Tony
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> On Apr 29, 2023, 9:57 PM, niftynei < niftynei at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> When I joined the lightning community a few years ago, I was relatively
> new to open source software and specification work. Rusty really impressed
> on me on the importance of holding conversations, as much as possible in
> public.
>
> Practically speaking, this encompasses IRC, this mailing list, and github
> issues/PRs.
>
> The reason for this is twofold. It helps document the range of options
> considered for technical decisions and it provides an interface point for
> new participants to contribute to the discussion.
>
> Given some recent mails that were posted to this list, now seems like a
> good time to reiterate the importance and preference of public
> communication whenever possible, especially for specification or technical
> discussions.
>
>
> ~ nifty
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lightning-dev mailing list
> Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230510/1f0f9268/attachment.html>;