[Members] Civil Disobedience
Bart van Bragt
jabber at vanbragt.com
Wed Aug 24 09:20:34 CDT 2005
Nolan Eakins wrote:
> Continuing my life long pursuit of civil disobedience along with a
> suggestion made on my blog about PetitionOnline.com, I put together the
> following two paragraphs to be used on a petition:
IMO it's much too early for such a harsh petition. Yes, I also strongly
dislike the fact that Google is talking about federation and that it
seems like they want to bind participants to that federation to a
certain set of rules set by them. IMO closing your network like this
(while pretending to be open) is very much against the philosophy behind
Jabber.
But let's first try to figure out what their plans are and see if we
(the JSF) can get into a normal dialogue with them before we start
accusing them. There was some proverb with flies and honey? :)
So far Google has been a nice player, I'm hoping that they will stick to
their "Don't be Evil" paradigm in this case.
Maybe the council should write an email/letter to Google about this
federation business? Their main concern seems to be spam and other abuse
and IMO they do have a point. I think we either have to convince them of
the fact that SPAM is perfectly controllable (of course you can't ban it
for 100%) or we have to work with them to make the XMPP network even
more resilient against Spammers (i.e. Web of Trust, domainkeys, etc).
Bart
More information about the Members
mailing list