I saved most of my replies to Joerg into one post. Not to say it's not relevant the conversation, it is. But it's more rehashed correction than it is "new material".

Quite the ego you have there. A non-native speaker, telling a native speaker he doesn't understand the language.

Since we're speaking grammatically: You should say "of the English language". The "the" in this case is required, and skipping it is as offsetting to native speakers as interchanging der for ein would be in German. Also, names of languages are generally capitalized in English.

Again you use words incorrectly. I said I was one of three that took on the legal responsibility of crafting it, setting up the bylaws, and signing for the legal formation of it. Inventing implies I came up with the idea, which I did not. In fact, the community had discussed the possibility several times, long before I was involved.

And had I to do over again, no, I would not have done that final part. Not because I don't want to see Maemo continue. But because knowing the legal headaches and position of liability it has put me in, I would have simply avoided taking on a legal role.

I have e-mails from you, signed with your private key, threatening legal action against WinMac and myself. Are you now denying you did that? Would you allow me to publish the proof of that? You've burned yourself on this one before. Think before you answer.

This is one of my biggest gripes about you: You make agreements (or threats) in private, and then deny them in public (or in a smaller group). It's a common thread with you, which has replayed itself several times.

And when Chemist found a free alternative, and put that in place, you accused him of starting a coup. Do you recall mentioning that about 15 posts ago? Why was it "a coup"? If it was "just a service you were stopping", why would you be upset when someone else addressed that need?

Which is your problem. You see no linkage there, when there is in fact a legal requirement to have it. You want "command" without the liability. To do that, someone else must have liability without command. Good luck finding that.

Were you around for the term where Rob was sole Council? Or the one after that, where Council "did as it pleased" with CA, despite huge community uproar over it? There have been plenty of times where this exact scenario has been the case. To say it's not true, when it clearly has been true, and claim others have a "disconnect" with what Council is and is not seems... just like you, actually.


I agree that Council is there to advocate for the community, but no, it's not legally obligated to carry out the whims of the community. The community has called for Flash 10 on the N900 for ages. If enough people petition, should Council put that on the servers? No. There are levels of sanity and legality to consider here. Yet that's exactly what you ask of the Board: To obey and be legally obligated to carry out the whims of Council.

Council is exactly what most have claimed it to be: A focal point for the community to channel it's noise through to the entity in charge of legally maintaining and operating the "stuff". Nothing more, nothing less. It's not TechStaffs manager. It doesn't hire people at Nemein. It never controlled what Nokia did, or when/how it did it. It's largest product has been ego and hot-air, neither of which are in short supply now either.