Re: The United Humans investment offer

>  Steven Rowat 
>  But even there I think it's fair to announce a project that looks for 
>  such investment *once*...
  
I agree with this. 
Just to be exhaustively clear - I have published announcement about UH project and seed offer *once*. Then after a few days I received Greg's question about whether it is going to be a foundation or a corporation. In his email he put CCG community into CC and I replied to all to keep the discussion public. I now see that his email is not on the website (https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2018Dec/) probably because his reply was filtered by mailing list's spam filters, but it got to me as I was in "To:" and when I replied to all it got to all.
 
I think as result of this discussion our community is becoming family-like as now we discuss who started to fight and why)))
 
>  Philipp Schmidt
>  Asking for investments as part of the announcement does not usefully
>  advance the discussion of the standards.
 
I think transparency and simplicity is the best approach to explain and _start building_ such complicated and multi-layered project as UH. 
 
>  Philipp Schmidt
>  Disregarding well-meaning suggestions for collaboration and continuing to
>  promote a personal project is a waste of everyone’s time.
 
I was trying to make my replies comprehensive and appropriate. I am sorry if some of them were taken as disregarding, it was not my intention.
 
>  Adam Lake
>  Kim, when you mentioned that RWoT is a more appropriate place to announce such projects are you referencing a slack channel?  
 
Adam, Kim could you please share the link to the RWoT Slack channel or this is for former participants only?  

> Kerri Lemoie
> Does anyone have a suggestion as to where we can shift these discussions elsewhere outside of this list? 

+1

-Bohdan
 


 ---- On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 20:31:21 +0200 Philipp Schmidt <ps1@media.mit.edu> wrote ---- 
 > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 11:42 AM Steven Rowat
 >  
 >  But I believe a line should be drawn at marketing aimed *at* the 
 >  group, ie., solicitation of investment in a project.
 >  
 >  But even there I think it's fair to announce a project that looks for 
 >  such investment *once* to the group, so at least we're aware of what's 
 >  happening.
 > 
 > I agree with the sentiment, but differ on some of the details. 
 > Project announcements seem useful if the projects build on the standards discussed here, regardless of their commercial or non-commercial nature. 
 > Asking for investments as part of the announcement does not usefully advance the discussion of the standards. 
 > And one additional point:
 > Disregarding well-meaning suggestions for collaboration and continuing to promote a personal project is a waste of everyone’s time.
 > My 2c...
 > P
 >

Received on Friday, 21 December 2018 19:39:46 UTC