As this is addressed to this audience I'm going to take the liberty of reposting it here:
A Clear[er] Future for CloudCamp (and cloud computing in general)
Earlier today Reuven Cohen posted about
A Bright Future for CloudCamp in which he publicly stated that he "
will happily transfer all related IP, domains, etc to the control of the [CloudCamp] organization" in response to (if not necessarily as a result of) my
Enomaly, Inc. owns CloudCamp™ - has it jumped the shark? post. The details of the organisation were light and there was indeed
some confusion over the trademark but Dave Nielsen confirmed that "
CloudCamp
will be turned into a for-profit ... OVER MY COLD, DEAD BODY! Also, as
you know, I have spent a lot of time researching the formation of CloudCamp as a non-profit (which is only fitting, since no-one has received any compensation ;-)."
Some key details are missing, such as how or indeed if the official(s)
will be elected and what form of non-profit will be formed - a section
503(c)(3) created on the basis of educational and/or scientific
services may also offer tax exemptions for sponsors in the US for
example. I'm expecting these to be clarified at the anniversary
CloudCamp event on 24 June 2009 and with lots of eyes on the details
there will be no room whatsoever for shenanigans - as I won't be there
be sure to ask plenty of questions if anything still seems out of
place. In particular it should be burnt into the memorandum and
articles of association that the organisation cannot be sold or have
its assets transferred to another entity that is not similar in spirit
(e.g. non-profit), and that the objective of the organisation should be
to educate about cloud computing rather than promotion of commercial
interests (e.g. the infamous trade association). The officials should
also be elected by organisers and/or participants (within say the first
year if not immediately at launch) who should be true members
of/subscribers to the organisation and thus able to vote; that way if
our illustrious leaders lose interest (or their minds) then the
community can continue. These requirements remove all temptation and
make us less of a target for subversion, thus guaranteeing CloudCamp's
continued viability (at least until we're so successful that it's no
longer relevant and "cloud" fades into the background like
"client-server" did a few decades ago).
In order to further improve transparency relating to the handling of
money I will set a good example by being 100% transparent with
CloudCampParis. That is, I commit to make available all details of
money received and spent for public scrutiny. So far we have a number
of €250 and €500 sponsorships confirmed or in the works and quotes for
€1,200 and €1,500 in catering (depending whether we go for bags or
buffet - I'd still prefer beer & pizza though), as well as
something like €750 in flights to get Dave there for this first French
event - we're on track to break even. I have already committed to
sponsors to ensure that all funds raised will be spent on the event
itself and encourage other organisers to follow suit. For those who
raised concerns about potential improprieties I encourage you to
challenge the organisers to justify their expenses with receipts and
hope that they will do so proactively in future; with complete
transparency there is no need for trust (and angst when trust is lost).
The real news of the day though follows on from my being (again)
silenced by a "consensus" (which included many of those implicated by my earlier allegations) and then immediately after flat out accused of "
only becom[ing] involved for one reason -- to try to fork the community"
(only now deprived the right of reply). This is clearly BS as if I
wanted to fork the community I just would have done so by feeding the
growing unrest rather than pushing the committee to put its cards on
the table; I have about as much interest in being at the "top" of what
I believe should be a completely flat structure as I do in contributing
to something which I believe could/will be eventually subverted for the
enrichment of a few individuals. Although I've been sharply critical at
times (more often than I would like), everything I post is [believed to
be] true and almost always links back to a primary source; this was a
flat out lie and it resulted in a
flat out threat should it not promptly be proven or retracted with an apology.
Immediately after Reuven forwarded my message clearly marked
CONFIDENTIAL to the public list, he and I got on the phone for half an
hour (the first time we've actually spoken) and discussed our
differences. He does a good job of summarising it so I'll just quote
him:
I just got off the phone with Sam. After almost a year
of public feuding, we finally actually spoke in person. First let me
say that email probably isn't the best method for dispute resolution. I
probably should have called Sam long ago. It's clear we share the same
passions for open cloud computing. In regards to my previous statements
about Sam's intention to fork CloudCamp, he has assured me that isn't
the case and he is committed to making the Paris CloudCamp event a
success we can all share. I believe him.
Going forward we agreed that continuing our feud is childish and does
more harm then good. We are going to actively work to strengthen our
relationship and put this ridiculous feud behind us. My request to Sam
is that in the future is if he does have a grievance he call me
directly before we take our frustrations public, we both agree this is
a better approach then a public battle.
Unfortunately
those of you who found all this rather entertaining will have to go
back to watching WWF as we're finally going to get on with furthering
the interests of cloud computing rather than [in]fighting (which makes
no sense whatsoever given we're not even competitors) or "inside
baseball"
according to one article. As TheOtherSam
pointed out:
Reuven recently wrote about two watershed epochs in the
development of the cloud industry. Given the energy and passion of
these two individuals, this event might mark a third!
Given things like the ill-fated
Open Cloud Alliance now have some chance of seeing the light of day, duplicate initiatives like the
Unified Cloud Interface (UCI) and
Open Cloud Computing Interface (OCCI) can work together and fiascos like the
Open Cloud Manifesto
are less likely to occur behind closed doors this may well prove
correct - one thing you can be sure of is that where I'm involved there
will be NoBullshit™
So let's close this chapter and get on with it...