Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

As a person responsible for creating this thread, I'll post my own small summary, aka what I (personally, not meant to be universal truth for everyone ;) ) gathered from it:

1. Neo900 is meant to be most open device in the market. Not necessarily 100% open as by example of projects like Arduino, but still much more than anything else in mobile computer/category of devices.

I would think that calling it "most open on the market" instead of "100% open" would be less missleading, but I understand that term "openess" may mean different thing for different people, and simply, it have marketing value to be (ab)used here.

2. I got better understanding on practical implication oh having schematics vs. project files. While I still think that having project files *could* be useful, thanks to this thread I understand better limitations that having project files have.

3. As I've just received a (affecting whole TMO account) "profile infraction" by Joerg The Project Leader The Moderator himself for one of my posts in this thread, it pretty much summarize for me, how some people value rights to openly discuss their "pet projects" - which may or may not affect how open projects he govern may be, if other involved people won't keep him at bay.

It also summarize past claims, that his moderator role was *only* to keep care of threads being properly categorized, and other tidy-keeping.

Thanks for participating, and of course, I'm still interested on poll results and - more importantly - more in depth opinions.

Cheers,
/Estel

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

I so far refrained from giving infractions, just gave a warning to stop damaging project by spreading lies.
NOW - that he asks for it so desperately - I do him the favour

[edit] to help avoid confusion: based on http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...0&postcount=31 I found "Personal attack" was the most appropriate description/reason for infraction points to hand out for that.

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

Indeed. I got confused, as the "warning from moderator joerg_rw" and profile infraction from moderator chemist appeared - for the same post - at the same time. Sorry for the confusion, I've edited my post to clear the misleading information.

/Estel

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

well, my "Reason: Infraction Warning 2014-05-19 13:54 by joerg_rw" been attached to (though not meant exclusively for) http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php...39#post1425939, particularly and context, therein, which evidently is an incorrect assertion (see Dos1's later post that clearly does the proof) used to construct a personal attack.
I don't see that post being edited "to clear the misleading information". Conclusion: either still confused, or intentionally tweaking facts another time.

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

I have no idea what initially went wrong between the two of you and frankly I don't care.
But the behavior of both of you starts hurting this community and probably the Neo900 project. So please stop it!

@Estel:
I see some misconceptions on your side (project files vs. schematics) and some claims about Joerg that you can't or at least didn't support with facts (essential(!) edits of his posts).

@Joerg:
I've been a moderator in some other forums and I think you're abusing your powers here by banning Estel. I always considered it a taboo to take action in an issue I was personally involved in. And you are clearly personally involved here. Ask another unbiased moderator to judge the situation!

I suggest you both go your own ways, try to minimize your contact and find a mediator if you can't avoid it. I'm volunteering for that role on Neo900-related topics as far as I'm able to understand the technical background.

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

Sulu,
the problem is that lies are accepted as the truth by general public when nobody stands up and fights them. I generally agree that I should refrain from moderating stuff that I'm personally involved in, which I did for the whole tsunami of incorrect and blatantly construed accusations and barely hidden insult Estel threw at me and others involved in Neo900 project during last few days. I tried to explain to Estel when he's wrong (and I caused some damage with that already) and I asked for help from peer moderators instead of giving infractions (via usual "report inappropriate post" button) when I felt that my public arguments with Estel would do too much damage to the community. The result been infraction points the admin assigned to Estel, it seems. The above recurrence though is just not possible to get verified/falsified by anybody publicly, Estel already received a warning (no infraction points involved) to not do that anymore and it's pretty obvious and not exactly a matter of insulting me personally so I would feel biased. So I gave an infraction with the most appropriate reason from the multiple-choice for infractions, that this forum offers for that purpose. And I suggested to Estel to approach tmo admin about it when he feels it's unfair or incorrect activity of me. I also added an according internal note to the infraction suggesting that this my activity is subject to re-evaluation by peer moderators and admin. The infraction added a 20 points to Estel's account which results in a temporary ban since there already been other non-expired infraction points on his account.
I agree that this whole issue does a lot of damage to the project and to the community, but I think that just ignoring Estel's misbehavior would do even more damage. From my side this is far from being a personal thing, I'm meanwhile used to that and immune against that from Estel's side. But I can't ignore the damage done by Estel irrespectively of somebody acting or not acting on that damage. That damage done to tmo community and Neo900 project, my personal feelings are irrelevant here.
I understand that when you see two guys fighting in the street you can't judge who started the fight or who's to blame, but I'm not a friend of punishing both due to the bystander's inability to judge.
Technical competence not needed in this issue, it's about common sense and forum rules. Thanks nevertheless for the offer to moderate.


BR
jOERG

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

How about locking this thread up ?? It keeps popping in active topics.

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

Come on guys, are you serious?
I understand that for some people openness means hardware openness as well, but come on, fighting each other and banning each other just for that?

I have been in this forum/community for less than a year and I respect so much all of you(even if I don't show this so much) and I think that banning someone is not the proper thing to do, even if he was mistaken!

Everyone has there own problems in real life, and we come here to just relax and have some fun and do/make things that we like, not to fight!

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

Yes, becouse you post in it. Think twice please ;)

Re: Is it fair to call Neo900 "100% open device"?
 

thread closed, according to request