Re: Re: Accusations

[Atul Chitnis <achitnis@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:

> 8< "I am a wounded martyr" post.

Wounded - yes. Martyr - no. Just because I am asking for a fair trial does
not make me a scheming manipulator of emotional responses.

> Hmmm... take a look at this.  If you will please clarify these points below
> (and withdraw your complaints to my boss - cc the list preferably), I will
> withdraw my comments as well.  [at the bottom of this mail]

First of all, get off your high horse. Your boss is a close personal
friend of mine, and there were other reasons for my writing to him -
reasons which were absolutely none of your business, or anyone else's. You
have done both yourself and your firm a disservice by publishing private
email.

Secondly, none of your arguments in *any* way prove (or even address) your
allegations that

- I/Exocore are trying hijack Linux in India

- that I am trying to build a personality cult for myself

- that I in any way have damaged Linux or the community


> I don't have any power / status / whatever to defend, thank you very much.

If you will notice, my post is aimed at my accusers. Notice the plural?

> I was following up to Ruchir Tewari btw ... and looks like Nagendra's
> statement can be taken as
>
> 1. PCQ does it itself (which is what I believe was being advocated in
> nagendra's post)

And which I questioned - understand that PCQ, Chip, etc. are *not*
internet firms, and would have to field the job out to someone, which
leads to...

> 2. PCQ gives some LUG bandwidth and a server (which is what Atul thought -
> correct me if I am wrong)

...this, which is what was indirectly implied by Prakash (and no illwill
intended in my response). Any sponsored facility is bound to raise
political issues. As I said - I speak from experience.

> > What exactly are you trying to say. If anybody decides to host
> > a server, they are doing you a service. Why and how would they
> > themselves misuse it ?
>
> A perfectly valid question.  Nobody ever brought up the subject of misuse
> and/or central coordination till you brought it up.  You then took umbrage to
> my saying that was scuttled because of overinflated egos on _all_ sides.

A perfectly valid question from me too. Just because no one brought it up
does not mean that the issue did not exist. I in fact referred to the
linux.org.in battle for control as an example, because it is a classic
case in point.

You imply with "over inflated egos" that *I* was trying to get control of
linux.org.in. My posts on this subject clearly said "register it in the
name Linus Torvalds, with control by the community" (i.e. Linux India).

Apparently you (and the others in that nasty battle) re-interpreted this
as "control of linux.org.in should be given to Atul". That was never asked
for, nor even implied.

To go further on this - to this day, I do not have control over
linux-india.org, nor have I asked for it or want it. The domain continues
to be controlled by KD.

I only provide DNS support (so that we can have things like
chennai.linux-india.org, mumbai.linux-india.org). These services are
provided via easydns.com, and I have paid for these services from my own
pocket.

My company sponsors web space for linux-india.org so that people have
access to the site via a fast local server. This is a project that has not
had much success because any association with anything I/Exocore are
involved in is treated as tainted, thanks largely to efforts by the very
same people who accuse me of all sorts of things. Perhaps for this reason
my requests to people for help with the site have not borne results.

If someone has a local server *and* thinks that he can do a better job (or
rather, get better support from the community), feel free to take this
away from Exocore (all you need to do is tell KD/Thaths/Arun, since they
in effect own linux-india.org, again something I have no problem with).

> You apparently hate being told that you may even be wrong, and reacted
> vehemently (and even more rudely) to it, descending to personalities
> yourself ...

I was never told I was wrong. I was attacked tangentially in a completely
unrelated fashion, for personal reasons, and with no substantiation
whatsoever.

> Still, if you could clarify that point above (and were really not advocating
> central control of linux mirrors), then we can both retract our individual
> statements and get on with our lives.

I have nothing to retract, and I have done nothing that needs an apology,
other than admitting that I was wrong when I expected fair treatment.

I do not have to apologise for putting you in my twit list on my server
(the point that seems to have riled you the most), or for sending you
***private*** messages over a whole year asking you to stop jumping on
people's bones on the lists.

I am being accused of wrongdoing, of hijacking and possibly profiteering.

I have a right to seek proof from you and Rag00 (and any other accusers -
feel free to hop in) supporting these allegations, or get exoneration from
them and have these implied black marks against me, my company and my
collegues removed in the eyes of our peers in the Linux community.

If you cannot provide such proof, you are implicitely stating that the
allegations are false.

Atul

p.s.  "Central control over mirrors"????? Where did *that* come from?
Whose suggestion was *that*??? Definitely not mine.

The only ones who seem to have referred to it were you and Rag00. I simply
said that companies (implied - who can afford it and have the abilities to
manage it) should offer to provide this services (mirrors) and run them as
a service for the community, but not *as* the community (because of the
politics this would raise).


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------
Atul Chitnis       | achitnis@xxxxxxxxxxx (PGP:6011BCB8)
Exocore Consulting | http://www.exocore.com
Bangalore, India   | +91 (80) 3440397 Fax +91 (80) 3341137
----------------------------------------------------------