Re: SPI violating bylaws and Debian constitution
>>>>> "NL" == Nils Lohner <lohner@ecf.teradyne.com> writes:
NL> I've set the reply-to to spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
NL> (subscription at http://purcel.spi-inc.org/mailing_lists/);
NL> please continue the discussion there. The list is very low
NL> volume; the archives will show what's been going on in the
NL> last year.
the machine va.debian.org failed over a month ago, taking spi-inc.org
secondary name service offline with it (and causing the CNAME for
www2.berlin-consortium.org to fail to resolve purcel, which is how we
noticed). the primary NS.spi-inc.org (209.41.108.203) is still online
but is not running a nameserver. you might want to remedy this
situation before proceeding with the spi-inc.org web pages.
NL> Agreed. What we need most are people who are willing to help
NL> as we cannot get it done with just four people. I know what
NL> needs to be done, but I don't have the time to go and do it
NL> due to a real-life work overload. Craig Small is working on
NL> the membership pages and I need to get in touch with him
NL> again.
not to sound too harsh, but is it not also prudent to ask whether SPI
as a group addresses a cause which continues to need addressing?
certainly free software projects are no longer in need of an
"incubator" group (sourceforge handles this more effectively than SPI
could ever hope to), the public is all too aware of the internet and
computers in general, and the licensing shenanigans of a year ago seem
largely to have died down. perhaps a revisiting of charter is in
order?
it seems to me that the most pressing issue now is heading off
reactionary legislation to tax/censor/snoop/search/prosecute computer
and internet related activity.
-graydon
Reply to: