Signed!

If anyone signs up for a whole clan I assume he/she is the leader/admin/president/banana of that clan and has power of attorney - so I add him and the clan to the validated signees, but not all of its members.

If a clan doesn't want to register all of its members to this forum the clan could also post the text on its site and let its members sign there. I'd need a link then in this thread to such page and would synchronize that. But if it is not too much trouble I'd ask everybody to sign here since everything else would make things really a lot of work for me.

I have no clue why div didn't sign this, but I am sure he read it and I respect his decision anyway.

Edit: typos.

signed


in the statement i'm on the list of signers as "kuniu",
sorry for a mess but i realizaed a bit too late that i have a different login here...

RoKenn wrote:

Spoiler:

Although that statement is a bit too soft. But hey, life consists of compromises and I'm too lazy to work out an alternate community statement. :P

:o) But remember:

Strong words weaken an otherwise good argument.

At the same time, Kedhrin Gonzalez continuously emphasized that he wants the Nexuiz community to be happy and that he is respecting the community.

would be better to use a different tense, like this: "he wants the Nexuiz community to be happy and that he respects the community."

Also, I confirm my signature.

Lamoot wrote:

At the same time, Kedhrin Gonzalez continuously emphasized that he wants the Nexuiz community to be happy and that he is respecting the community.

would be better to use a different tense, like this: "he wants the Nexuiz community to be happy and that he respects the community."

Agree, but too late :o/

How come too late? No editing of the initial post?

halogene wrote:Strong words weaken an otherwise good argument.

I'm not talking about insulting anyone but just taking a clearer position against hijacking the name.
And a clear statement against a GPL violation, if one will be proven.

Signed.

Lamoot wrote:How come too late? No editing of the initial post?

Hmmm I guess no one would mind if I changed that, but then again this error is not that grave either, is it.

RoKenn wrote:I'm not talking about insulting anyone but just taking a clearer position against hijacking the name.
And a clear statement against a GPL violation, if one will be proven.

Ah ok. About that GPL violation I am not so sure myself if we will be able to prove that nor if there will be a violation at all. So in my opinion its best to leave it at mentioning that there are debates about GPL violations. If we find out about violations lateron, then we should of course take action.

I am wondering a bit how the text could be clearer about our position against hijacking the name... I mean, that is the intended main message of the text? If that isn't clear enough, maybe we should still work on the text a bit more. Anyway, it is not up to me to decide when this is final or not in the first place, only it was lying there on piratepad for 24 hours without a significant change...

Signed.

About the name issue: I would think the point is well made.
If the statement is held back too long because of details, it will loose its significance.
And if it would be revised again, it would have to be (re-)re-signed.

I'd like to clarify my problems with the text:
1. too soft
2. even if they bend over the name, that won't make AT an appropriate FOSS maintainer
3. doesn't suggest any kind of plan in case the name stays the same
4. and it's clear by now that the name does stay the same

Not to discourage anyone from signing, of course. Do what you think is right.

RoKenn wrote:

halogene wrote:Strong words weaken an otherwise good argument.

I'm not talking about insulting anyone but just taking a clearer position against hijacking the name.
And a clear statement against a GPL violation, if one will be proven.

Yes indeed. But theres nothing stopping further statements from group/s of ppl wanting to highlight specific issues. Lets hope there will be some of that, done with the same great care, too.

a_grue wrote:I'd like to clarify my problems with the text:
1. too soft
2. even if they bend over the name, that won't make AT an appropriate FOSS maintainer
3. doesn't suggest any kind of plan in case the name stays the same
4. and it's clear by now that the name does stay the same

Not to discourage anyone from signing, of course. Do what you think is right.

Thanks for clarifying. I think the main reason why there is no plan mentioned in case IllFonic doesn't change the name is that there is none. Either we have a silly parallel world with that console version or we start using a different name for our project, both options are not satisfying at all.

Apart from that I don't agree to 1. and 2., but that may be only me.

Signed.

Signed. [ToX]BennyDacks

http://NexuizFiles.com - Nexuiz Videos/News
http://NexuizGPL.com - Nexuiz GPL Awareness
http://nexuizclans.com - Nexuiz Social Blogging Network

signed.
cheers.

SIGNED!


I also hereby boycott all of illfonic's products, and future products (dont know if they have ever managed to man up and release their own stuff, dont care either).

halogene wrote:

a_grue wrote:I'd like to clarify my problems with the text:
1. too soft
2. even if they bend over the name, that won't make AT an appropriate FOSS maintainer
3. doesn't suggest any kind of plan in case the name stays the same
4. and it's clear by now that the name does stay the same

Not to discourage anyone from signing, of course. Do what you think is right.

Thanks for clarifying. I think the main reason why there is no plan mentioned in case IllFonic doesn't change the name is that there is none. Either we have a silly parallel world with that console version or we start using a different name for our project, both options are not satisfying at all.

Apart from that I don't agree to 1. and 2., but that may be only me.

I might add that there is always the possibility to take further actions, including setting up another statement that clearly states a course of action or consequences. Is there anything in the text that is expressing something you couldn't agree to? Because looking at your explanation I am only seeing things that are missing from your point of view. If not, then you could, in theory, still sign it and start to prepare a follow up text that includes the items that you think are missing.

Just a thought, but of course it is your own decision and I respect that in any case.

halogene wrote:

halogene wrote:

a_grue wrote:2. even if they bend over the name, that won't make AT an appropriate FOSS maintainer

I might add that there is always the possibility to take further actions, including setting up another statement that clearly states a course of action or consequences. Is there anything in the text that is expressing something you couldn't agree to? Because looking at your explanation I am only seeing things that are missing from your point of view. If not, then you could, in theory, still sign it and start to prepare a follow up text that includes the items that you think are missing.

Just a thought, but of course it is your own decision and I respect that in any case.

According to the letter, the dispute will be settled if IllFonic changes the name. I, however, advocate either p.3 here, or plan A here. Both of these two options suggest that a name change would be insufficient. The former doesn't seem relevant anymore, so right now I see fork as the only solution.

a_grue wrote:According to the letter, the dispute will be settled if IllFonic changes the name. I, however, advocate either p.3 here, or plan A here. Both of these two options suggest that a name change would be insufficient. The former doesn't seem relevant anymore, so right now I see fork as the only solution.

Thanks for explaining, now I understand your point of view.

In my opinion, this is all about bad decisions. Decisions are being made by people, and people make mistakes. Now, I don't know any of the people involved personally, so I cannot judge if any one of them is a complete ass-hat. So I basically assume none of them is. Therefore, from my point of view it is a good idea to be open for people correcting the mistakes they have made instead of cutting all ties immediately.

I agree, though, that there needs to be a discussion about the future of Nexuiz in general. But I feel not in the position to make any suggestions in that respect, I mean, I am a PLAYER of this game, not a contributor (except for maybe Noob teaching, helping out with information if I coincidentally happen to have them and participating in spam threads on the forum once in a while).

Signed.

Clear message halogene.

Signed.

Signed!

I also confirm the Prophets - Minsta Clan in my position as it's admin

Signed

Signed

Do I just say "Signed" here, then?

Signed

I noticed a few minor grammar errors, but, as you mentioned earlier, I didn't see any that were grave, and it seems to be too late to edit. I would like to say that my only real problem is the use of "Nexuiz" without a ":(sub name)".

halogene wrote:...or we start using a different name for our project...

That would be an "own goal" in my opinion. Hope it will never happen..

Signed

and Signed by the [BOT] clan as well - http://www.bot-nexuiz.de.tl/

Thanks for all your signatures!