On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 1:02 PM, Bruce Hoult <br...@hoult.org
> So you're not at this moment sure whether members of a working group would
> be indemnified? Maybe they are, maybe they are not. Fair enough.
> I'm no expert, but would it not be the case that someone outside such a
> working group, trying to influence the direction of the working group via,
> say, public mailing lists posts, would have absolutely no prospect of being
> protected from lawsuits in the event that their advice appeared to have been
huh. good point. i would hazard a guess that it would revolve
around who is formally assigned or agreed to the responsibility.
honestly though i don't know.
> I prefer to worry more about technical matters than hypothetical lawsuits,
> but I don't see how it's any more dangerous contributing from inside the
> tent than out.
... leaving that aside (despite really appreciating the insight you
raised), yes it would indeed be nice to be able to discuss technical
matters.... but krste's shut the conversation down before it could get
started. if it was anyone else, the conversation could potentially
continue, but krste (apologies for referring to you in the third
person, it's partly necessary: i'm aware you'll be reading this) is in
a particularly unique position of influence which i'll outline a bit
i don't know if you're aware of it, krste, but people are scared of you.
from reading the book "invisible dynamics"  i'm keenly aware that
it's important to recognise and appreciate that you are both
technically extremely capable *and* also one of the earliest people
involved in RISC-V. that makes you an extremely valuable contributor,
and also it places you in a position of enormous influence and lends a
much higher significance to your words than anyone else who might wish
to speak and/or contribute to RISC-V.
thus, if you say something, *nobody* wants to contradict you.
absolutely nobody. why not? well, because (a) you're highly likely
(technically) to be right, having far more knowledge than them but (b)
just as importantly they will fear that they're overstepping somehow
(because you're a longer-standing contributor than them) and (c) the
consequences for them of contradicting or being *perceived* to
contradict you might be really quite disproportionately severe.
* for people in corporations, if they're seen to be pissing you off
in some way, that's their own job prospects they just pissed on.
* likewise for people in academia.
* for people in the open hardware and free software world it's
slightly different: their bread-and-butter depends on good-will and on
reputation... and if they ever find themselves in a pissing contest
with you, their reputation is *instantly* shot to shit and they'll be
completely ostracised... forever [the public memory of the internet's
a bitch... cf archive.org
so *they* won't say anything to you *either*.
me? i'm known for speaking my mind, plain and simple. no bullshit,
no agenda. i don't *have* a "reputation" to "protect", and i don't
agree to enslave myself to pathological profit-maximising corporations
. that makes me quite possibly literally the only person in the
world who's ever going give you some insights into how your words
affect the RISC-V Project, and i'm hearing from multiple sources, as
well as observing personally instances where, RISC-V's development is
[summarising / paraphrasing] heavily / unduly / overbearingly
influenced and controlled by UCB-BAR.
now, i have no control over you. you are your own person, as is
everyone else. you make your own decisions. what brings anyone
together and puts them in a situation where they might have to take
into account other people and other people's input and influence is
when a goal is shared between them. and within that context - sharing
of the goal of moving RISC-V forward - i'm seeing evidence that some
of the "Systemic Laws" (as they put it) outlined in "Invisible
Dynamics"  being violated. these issues are easy to fix... but
important to acknowledge, where acknowledging the situation is (as
opposed to "denial"), interestingly, one of the six Systemic Laws.
anyway, like i said: i have no control over you. you have absolutely
no reason to listen to a word i say. your decisions are entirely your
responsibility. the only thing that i am permitted to do is to bring
this to your attention, to make you (and others) aware. what you do -
where you go from here - is entirely your responsibility.
 cf the documentary "The Corporation" and Professor Yunus "Creating
a World Without Poverty".