Why would him stepping down be for the good of the OpenSats? How is this related to OpenSats?
Discussion
nostr:nprofile1qqsw3znfr6vdnxrujezjrhlkqqjlvpcqx79ys7gcph9mkjjsy7zsgygpr9mhxue69uhhqatjv9mxjerp9ehx7um5wghxcctwvsq3samnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdehhxarjd93kztnrdaksz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ekk7um5wgh8qatz7tvu4p sits on the 9 member board that determines what projects are funded by the organization. There is a growing view that Bitcoin projects are not being funded by OpenSats due to conflicts of interests from board members. Regardless if NVK is abstaining or not, his presence on the board only leads to concerns from members of the Bitcoin community. There are very qualified members of the community that could provide the technical guidance to the Board's decisions that are not nearly in a level of conflict that NVK brings.
The "Bitcoin community" should start it's own non-profit to pay devs. Especially if there are very qualified members. OpenSats is an organization. Organizations are not decentralized. They are centrally controlled. If you don't like Open Sats because you don't like 11.1111% of the board, I would consider donating to a different non-profit.
I understand your concern but your recommendation sounds entitled and irrational.
That literally what was said earlier. "They lose donations with him on the board." Meaning people ARE not donating if they don't like 11% of the board. The request to step down is a suggestion for Opensats, not you.
Poeple should understand what a "majority vote" means.
That process is irrelevant to stepping down, which was the suggestion.
It's a retarded suggestion that lacks understand of how the org works.
As it is to be a simp for someone with a track record of being a bad actor in the FOSS space.
You confuse simping with disagreeing. To be clear, NVK is a douchebag for suing an open source dev. However, that doesn't mean he's a bad board member for OpenSats (which is an unpaid position).
Please address the following or fuck off. I'm tired of repeating myself.
You're a simp. I'm not engaging in your gaslighting.
Everytime you've pointed the finger here three have been pointing back at you.
People can have bad days. That was last night. You doubled down this morning. Showing who you really are. It's sad to see. Enjoy your bed with NVK. I'm out.
The contention is not that his vote would weigh more than others. The issue brought up is that FOSS is a mindset diametrically opposed to copyright. To be on a board promoting and funding FOSS projects has a responsibility to be objective. The conflict of interest involved with making copyright claims on a FOSS project because it seems to "Infringe" on one's own product leads one to think: If one 9th of the board is compromised ethically, I have an 11% chance of my donations being squandered by passing up projects "Too close" to projects NVK might have an interest in. This is not retarded or irrational. I don't care about Opensats myself as I give charity only to people I know personally. This is merely an explanation of where others are coming from.
It's majority voting.
I don't know why you wrote this. I know that, as I wrote, that is not the contention. Again, it is the mindset around FOSS and intellectual property when being on a board that awards donations to FOSS projects.
Think about it this way: If someone was on the board for distribution of funds towards technological advancement but they were Amish. You might have a conflict of interest there right? But just one Amish person on the board doesn't sway the vote. They just don't have the requisite mindset for the position. Do you see my point?
If the Amish person has hours of recorded conversation that demonstrates a clear understanding of FOSS, I'd say send it
I feel like I am not being clear. Understanding is not the issue, either. I UNDERSTAND war-mongers, thieves, and globalist control fiends. I am just ideologically opposed to them. Like the Amish to technology in my example or NVK and and FOSS in real life.
how about donating directly to devs?
Opensats is losing credibility and thereby donations with him on the board, which hurts the greater FOSS community upon which Bitcoin is built.
Some of my personal favorite FOSS projects are clearly discriminated against by the Opensats board.
He is 11% of the board. Any other board members with issues?
Conflicts of interests, absolutely.
In the name of transparency you should probably disclose your business relationship causing your own personal bias here.
I have no dog in this fight. Only interested in FOSS, which is what Opensats is supposed to be supporting.
No one has worked harder to obfuscate the definition of FOSS.