Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Web version of freeciv. Please mention the site you're using, if speaking things other than general freeciv-web codebase.
Fuzzy
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2021 2:32 pm

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by Fuzzy »

louis94 wrote:
cazfi wrote:In an earlier inconsistency between the version live server run and what github shows by default (master branch) I were told that it was actually 'dev' branch that contained the version on server. Haven't checked if it apply this time. But it's possible that this is just oversight in documentation.
Right, thanks cazfi! Wondering why new development takes place on master (your PRs) and dev at the same time, but most importantly the code is there!

Apologizes to FCW admins, editing my previous message to not let anyone believe that my claims are true.

Can you look at your edit? It's not clear at all that you have retracted your accusations - evidenced by the fact that I replied to it as if you were still making them. I thought your edit meant you were ensuring your post was there for historic purposes - and I would appreciate, especially given you make allegations of piracy, that you give an edit as strong as your (false) accusations...

For anyone else reading along, here is the commit for the change. It was published almost immediately: https://github.com/Lexxie9952/fcw.org-s ... af6a8e7ac0


Louis, you and I (I'm sure) have some mutual respect. However, I don't see how your actions in jumping to false conclusions so quickly here are helping the community. You could have messaged us in private and avoided so much embarrassment and drama.

After a serious overdose of these dramas, FCW is trying hard to build bridges.

In my opinion we need to organise some guidelines to heal and move past these tiring arguments.
Lexxie
Veteran
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by Lexxie »

FCW has to make this statement, unfortuntaely, for historical record only.

TL;DR: We have a bad actor making false claims against us and it's important to clarify FCW's position on the false claims in the event that continued wrongdoing of this individual would lead to legal disputes between us and the individual making the wrongdoing against us.

...
Louis M. said:
"I however give the operators of the website one full week to manifest themselves, provide an explanation and restore conformity (since they have posted here before, I assume that they are still subscribed to this thread). Note that this grace period is purely voluntary since FCW's rights under the AGPL were terminated the second they started being non-conforming again. In the absence of a timely reply from them, I will unfortunately be compelled to conclude that the administrators of https://www.freecivweb.org/ have willingly engaged into piracy."
This thing is false 77 which ways to Sunday. Let's address the falsehoods one at a time.

Let's replace your first false statement with a more accurate one:
False statement:
"FCW's rights under AGPL were terminated the second they started being non-conforming again."
Correct statement:
Certain rights and not others, under the AGPL, terminate the second time an accurately made enforcement is triggered upon a non-conforming case of project content that is AGPL licensed.

The difference is huge. In the first one, you make it sound like the entire project has the plug pulled on it. In reality, if any of the other false claims were true, we would lose rights to any inherited/submitted AGPL content from the particular claimant (i.e. you.) In the particular case of you, Louis, that means absolutely nothing at all. We had previously notified you of outright fallaciousness of your claims to possess any AGPL content whatsoever in our project. So we're talking about what here, hot air. Nothing said afterward really matters except if you did have AGPL content in our project, so let's pretend for a second that you did, just to show you're still living in a cave of ignorance.

Let's move on. There is more false information to fix here.

The following is information you have been notified of previously and invited to specifically give us contact with your legal counsel. In your post, you have willfully omitted accurate information we delivered to you. You have never supplied any adequate legal opinion nor argument nor clause in the license that counteracts the correct information we supplied you. Specifically, you omit mentioning that:

1. Under common law, a contract violator or license violator has no rights, if himself first violating a license, to trigger licensing enforcements on others in a contract or license for any infractions that came after his first act of violation. This supersedes the license. We notified you of MULTIPLE reasons under which you were yourself violating the license when making your claims. Perhaps you could argue one or two of our supplied reasons were not valid, but not all of them. You stand on fabricated air and not solid ground.

2. Whether or not (1) is true, there is another problem for you. Your own status with regard to the license invalidates any right to make a licensing demand; even IF all the other false claims had been true. (For the record, I was told that they were a "wild stretch of imagination clearly invalidated by all precedent.") We informed you of all this, you did not respond with any valid counter, and yet in public you pretend as if none of the dismissals on your false claims had ever happened.

3. Since this malicious person has cost the community weeks of development time and features that players want, in the interest of preventing next time, I will share some advice I had to learn during this time of fighting off this bad actor. Here is advice to his next victim, that willhopefully will help you if Louis chooses you for his next hostile target:
a. He seems to have an ignorant confusion that every single bit or byte an AGPL project touches, instantly and ipso facto becomes AGPL itself. You may dismiss any angle he takes from this direction; only AGPL content is covered by AGPL.
b. He seems to have ignorant confusion that every person in the world is a licensor with rights over every bit or byte the project touches. You may dismiss any angle he takes from this direction; (A)GPL licenses only give rights to two classes of individual. I suggest pre-emptively exercising your right to ban him as your user and notify him beforehand, so he has no AGPL rights at all. His will retain an ability to attack you with GPL rights but you will find these much more reasonable to manage. As for non-AGPL content, it does not fall under AGPL (obviously!) Yes it could conceivably fall under other rights IF AND ONLY IF there are other non-AGPL rights related to said content. You may dismiss any angle he takes from this direction.
c. He seems to believe that wherever there are content release and licensing options within a project, that he is able to selectively define those for you, and set your own content release policies. You may dismiss any angle he takes from this direction.

Louis, as a pretended licensor claimant, you continue to claim additional restrictions to our licenses that are not within the licenses. This means you are continuing a licensing infraction upon us and are in violation of said license. FCW hereby gives you notice to immediately make yourself compliant.
Lexxie
Veteran
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by Lexxie »

For anyone else reading along, here is the commit for the change. It was published almost immediately: https://github.com/Lexxie9952/fcw.org-s ... af6a8e7ac0
It was published even better than immediately. It was on the repo BEFORE it was on the server. ;)

Re: the banter about master, dev, and release branch. I have at great length in other places explained that we are attempting to improve our repository workflow for better upstream integration; this would allow the greater community to get more of the FCW features and rulesets that are best-in-class.

Rather than gratitude for doing this and all the features that have a long history of being shared and gifted to the community, the usual suspects who are in jealous competition with us, waited for my vacation to opportunistically launch a fake "AGPL violator" attack on us, in spite of themselves being violators prior to it and not fixing their own compliance issues prior to launching said attack, AND refusing to do so before making the claims against us, AND when asked to first do that. Which technically means--you guessed it--all their claims were zero and void and absolutely invalid. And moreover, due to the lost time, actually retarded the process of getting everyone through the process.

What do you call someone who refuses to just be compliant first AND refuses using proper back channels to get whatever code they actually needed or wanted for something, AND lies in public about "poor us we're amateurs just trying to get compliant" WHILE pretending to be unaffiliated with each other AND knowingly avoiding easy steps to get compliant AND then politicking a big public drama to divide the community AND set different sides against each other AND drain huge amounts of development time from project features we all want? I know what I call such people. What you call them is up to you.

Net cost of that publicity stunt to the project maintainers and to the community of players:
Major loss of creative new features for the community
Fractured divisionism
Grudges and bad feelings
Major slowing/retardation of the 3.2 client agnostic integration project
Disruption of collaborative workflow between developers
Reputational damage to the major evolvers and contributors to the project
Mental anguish and exhaustion to people in the crossfire of it

I'd like to thank those who are intending, like us, to make sure bad actors NEVER find some new stunt like this to pull on the community ever again. At the risk of sounding combative, I have to name the individuals just this once, so everyone can notice start noticing some fact patterns when they do it again. These people, so called "Cobra" or "Op42" who have for the last few years been engaged cohesively together in similar initiatives to hurt the community:

Zekoz/Zoltan, Wieder, Louis M., and two others I won't name out of respect for them recently showing somewhat better behaviour. (Because amnesty is not only possible but preferred!) Recently and to a lesser degree and somewhat unaware of being a 'pawn' or 'puppet' of these people's agenda: Canik.

IF you are one of these individuals: (1) Focus more on your own server, development, and creative output. (2) Do not try to compete with other servers through zero-sum game factionalism and reputational damage campaigns: in the land of "eye for eye, tooth for tooth", no one has eyes or teeth. Focus on your own goals, quietly get inspired by features the others do and imitate or improve on them. (3) Mind your own business, no one wants to hear anything you say about any of the other server operators, ever again. Trust me on this. They don't want to hear what I'm saying here even, but I have a paradox of having to mention each other when proposing the "leave each other alone" policy.

These individuals named above have collusively and coherently operated in a way that has absolutely devastated collaborative results within the greater community. I have no time to prove it's true, let's focus instead on making sure nothing of the sort comes from these people in the future. They can prove me wrong and I'd happily eat my words, in the greater interest of the project. Recent events however, sadly, are only proving me right.

PS. Change is possible. To get different results only requires, not perpetuating the same mistakes !
cazfi
Elite
Posts: 3077
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:54 pm

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by cazfi »

Fuzzy wrote:Louis, you and I (I'm sure) have some mutual respect. However, I don't see how your actions in jumping to false conclusions so quickly here are helping the community. You could have messaged us in private and avoided so much embarrassment and drama.

After a serious overdose of these dramas, FCW is trying hard to build bridges.
For the "jumping conclusions" part FCW should fix their misleading setup. The master branch is currently presented as "The current state of the https://www.freecivweb.org server. " by master branch being the default one that one gets when either entering github page or after pulling the repository. Nothing indicates the user that one should also switch branch. Se while the source code is available (in the dev branch), it's not where people are lead to believe it to be.
Lexxie
Veteran
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by Lexxie »

cazfi wrote:
For the "jumping conclusions" part FCW should fix their misleading setup. The master branch is currently presented as "The current state of the https://www.freecivweb.org server. " by master branch being the default one that one gets when either entering github page or after pulling the repository. Nothing indicates the user that one should also switch branch. Se while the source code is available (in the dev branch), it's not where people are lead to believe it to be.
Please enable this and other things to get done by taking action on the 4 hours per day being lost to this kind of stuff, re: recent email to upstream.
User avatar
Canik
Veteran
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:26 am

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by Canik »

Lexxie wrote: What do you call someone who refuses to just be compliant first AND refuses using proper back channels to get whatever code they actually needed or wanted for something, AND lies in public about "poor us we're amateurs just trying to get compliant"
I was a poor amateur just trying to get compliant though. Struggling to get code working as you only had a broken development version available on your github not the actual state of your site. In fact I am still dealing with errors in the code due to this.

This is not your only statement I have some disagreement with. However, I'll let it be as I am glad you do appear to be taking steps to improve the availability and accuracy of code on your github and hope this trend continues.

edit: Plus I do want to stop spending 4 hours per day on this and move forward. This (as well as continuing to work out bugs from trying to build a site from development versions) is costing significant development delays on my end too.
louis94
Hardened
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:17 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by louis94 »

Fuzzy wrote: Can you look at your edit? It's not clear at all that you have retracted your accusations - evidenced by the fact that I replied to it as if you were still making them. I thought your edit meant you were ensuring your post was there for historic purposes - and I would appreciate, especially given you make allegations of piracy, that you give an edit as strong as your (false) accusations...
Hi Fuzzy! Thanks for jumping in and sorry for the unfortunate wording :oops:, I wanted to take the edit out as quickly as possible and didn't realize the double meaning (aside: this forum is not a good place for long-term preservation, it went down in the past and one of the admins was also caught deleting messages he didn't like). I've just edited the text color to be very hard to read. Let me know if you have a better sentence.
Fuzzy wrote: Louis, you and I (I'm sure) have some mutual respect. However, I don't see how your actions in jumping to false conclusions so quickly here are helping the community. You could have messaged us in private and avoided so much embarrassment and drama.
Thanks for the heads up. I think the level of distrust Lexxie has managed to build around herself (at least as far as I am concerned) made me forget that there are other, less visible, proponents and identify FCW = Lexxie. I've been avoiding direct messages with her for reasons one could find by browsing this forum, so the only option left was to go public.

----

Lexxie, if I anyhow broke a license please let me know where and how and I will fix it immediately. Direct messages through this forum will work. Please also don't involve others, the mislead post was my own initiative.
Lexxie
Veteran
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by Lexxie »

TL;DR: Canik is not an innocent "poor little amateur" who "just tried to get compliant", but knowingly, deliberately, and wantonly engaged in a campaign to steal code from FCW and try to use that anti-competitively against us WHILE working with agents and affiliates who assisted him in orchestrated hypocritical licensing attacks against FCW that knowingly turned a blind eye to his pattern of theft and licensing violations.

Canik's Claim:
Struggling to get code working as you only had a broken development version available on your github not the actual state of your site.[/quote]
Absolute lies.
1. A repository is not "a version" like exists on a real file system. It is an archaeological record of every version it has ever existed as. It's a simple matter of going to our last commit made before our last public release, the exact day and hour of which is well known to you.

What your site was doing was skillfully, expertly, non-amateurly, and selectively cherry picking some of our pre-release features and not others, modifying those features, and doing a hell of a lot of other very non-amateur operations. You made a decision to selectively pre-release some of our NON-RELEASE developmental code ahead of the last known release to "co-opt" or "trump" us in releasing our own celebrated launch features before us, with the flagrant audacity to imply to people some kind of superiority of your site in having our features ahead of FCW, which you misrepresented in a way to let people infer to be your own features making you competitively superior.
In fact I am still dealing with errors in the code due to this.
1. You are dealing with errors in the code due to your cadre's decision to pre-release cherrypicked parts of our unreleased server ahead of its release while ignoring and deliberately modifying other parts. Once you choose to diverge, the only one to blame is in the mirror.
I was a poor amateur just trying to get compliant though.
Yes we're already aware your failed "poor me' argument to wave the "plausible deniability" flag. Let's nuke this LIE one more time.

2. Whether you are an amateur or not is irrelevant. You must first be compliant yourself BEFORE making legal demands on your licensor. Normally when someone wants something from someone upstream from them, do you think they try hard to comply and be friendly and work it out in back channel to maintain a good relationship, or instead, break their promised agreements and go on an immediate public propaganda offensive where they stubbornly remain noncompliant WHILE setting up a cadre of skilled expert people to make public political statements and orchestrate the public view to discredit the upstream source from whom they're stealing? Yes, it's stealing when you're noncompliant and introducing your own HIDDEN FEATURES while taking the features from someone else to try to outcompete them, the dreaded "Parasite Paradigm" which is the worst capital offense in any open source project. But this, as bad as it is, isn't the worst. Let's get down to objective unarguable facts and nuke these lies DEAD.

What matters objectively is the fact that YOU BEING A NONCOMPLIANT LICENSE VIOLATOR while making licensing demands from the repository you steal from, ABSOLUTELY NUKES any shred of solid ground you have to stand on and every other argument you can ever make, period. Forever. Finito. Game over player one. You're out. Get in the doghouse. Whip your back 77 times, wear a goat hair vest, and beg humble forgiveness for your sins on your knees to the rest of the community. You, sir, are in the doghouse of shame for this stunt. Every other argument is now irrelevant.


But, just for the sake of the crowd who may wonder a little more about this "I'm just a poor amateur" theory... let's look a tiny bit under the dirt, shall we?

3. You colluded and affiliated with EXPERTS. They helped you set up the site compliantly at first. Anyone watching the site, like me, clearly saw steps and changes being made later to worth WITH you to make the site noncompliant, changing its workflow. Interesting. We were fooled into thinking these were White Knight Crusader Champions of Open Source Compliance, coming to your aid against the evil closed source Lexxie... but what does deeper investigation reveal?? That they strategised this and WANTED people to think that, while deliberately pursuing a different strategy altogether. FACT PATTERNS that they don't think people will dig deep enough to see, are the smoking gun and fingerprints of this premeditated CRIME SCENE.

Question. Do real white knight crusaders, Instead of warning you or helping you with your own noncompliance, knowingly and DELIBERATELY ASSIST YOU IN PURSUING YOUR STRATEGY OF making license demands on ANOTHER SITE while stubbornly keeping you NON-COMPLIANT? Do they, after repeated protests that your legal attacks could not be taken seriously UNTIL you were first made compliant, stubbornly refuse to first correct your own NONCOMPLIANT VIOLATIONS AND CODE THEFT in a mere several minutes? Do white knight open source crusaders stubbornly NOT do that but instead spend DAILY HOURS continuing to pursue attacks in public against us, accompanied with the full enchilada of hours of daily propaganda wars, reputation-degrading accusations, public politics, false accreditation for features, false claims and slander in almost every theatre both public and private.... harrassment, threats to doxx people, LEGAL THREATS? Wait, what's going on here? Something doesn't smell right in this "poor little amateur me" hypothesis. Wouldn't "poor little me" be asking something like "hey can someone help me get compliant so I have a right to access your code again? I want to keep a good reputation with the people whose years worth of code and features and technically I'm thieving it, so could one of you guys who is attacking Lexxie for hours a day just set me up? Thanks!" YES YOU'RE DAMNED RIGHT, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT POOR LITTLE AMATEUR ME WOULD DO! How strange, that's not at all anything like what you did. Nah, ... lies, politics, poaching, subversion, slander, orchestrated offensives with your "white knights" while stubbornly remaining noncompliant, "Red Hat Squash commits" to erase the paper trail and credits and evidence of your activities, made by mysterious people naming one huge mega-commit as "Canik is dumb", made by mysterious people who ARE NOT the same ones helping you pursuing the legal attacks to take our site down. Wait! What's going on here with this poor little amateur me" strategy? This is looks like something completely different! It smells like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck. What is it's a duck! Absolutely rotten. But whether anyone believes it or not is objectively irrelevant. Any rights you have to pursue any argument against us was absolutely nuked by the fact that you aggressively pursued licensing demands upon us for a period of weeks where you refused to first be compliant yourself.

"White knight open source crusaders helping poor little amateur me". BULL*HIT!


Final statement to the court and jury.

What kind of heinous hypocrites ALL collectively orchestrate this public offensive together, when in 5 minutes they could easily make you compliant?
Would non-biased angels of open source do all this while ignoring your non-compliance and Parasite Paradigm of code theft? Are we supposed to think this concerted effort is plausibly excused by the "poor amateur me" theory? ABSOLUTELY NOT. No poor amateur in the world who wants a good relation with the upstream source from which they took their code, would ever pursue such a heinous abomination and sin against open source ethics. Something else is going on here and I'm about to tell the enraptured audience what it really is.

What it is, is clear proof of the Parasite Paradigm we know you were pursuing. You parasitically stole code from the parent fork while hiding your own content (yes, it's STOLEN when you're deliberately noncompliant.) Make public claims of superiority over the host organism by pre-releasing their features before them, poach their users and donors from the parent-victim site, slander the host victim operators to the old loyal users who are abhorred to hear your lies, then brilliantly create a political scandal to undermine their reputation and to try to get everyone to migrate to you. Kill off the host and rise to the top as the czar. Heist complete. That was the attempted plan. Remember, the same plan you kinda allluded to when doing gunboat diplomacy and threats to me in private? Yeah, that plan.

PROBLEMA GRANDE, señor! If this ever goes legal there is something called LEGAL DISCOVERY where all your plans gets subpoena and all your chat logs, all your github logins and activities, all of it are out in public. This puts you in a stalemate where you can't make any legal attacks whatsoever anymore.

Your so-called "white knights of open source crusades" encouraged and helped you to pursue this strategy while secretly calculating to use you as a pawn in their ongoing and continuous slander and reputation wars that they inflict us with over the last three years, which you have privately complained with me about for ages BEFORE you suddenly deny it in public to everyone else the minute you made an "alliance of convenience" with the Evil Op42.

Questions for the Jury.
Sometimes the simplest he-said she-said arguments can be resolved by looking at simple FACT PATTERNS. Let's all ask ourselves this simple question to get right under the dirt and straight to the truth of what's going on here. One simple question:
Q: Do white knight open source crusaders...
1. Spend hours every day making dubious legal threats about licenses on behalf of someone who is an openly noncompliant parasite, against the very site from whom he is stealing code,
....OR....
2. Provide 10 minutes of simple help on the site they already helped set him up, to get compliant first, then approach collaboratively in back channels in a friendly way about any code or content they're interested in?

Question 2:
Are Op42 people historically known to collude in a unified anti-FCW front to attack us every single issue we've ever had, not a single time defending us against criminals who make DoS hacking attacks, spoofed login attacks, reputational slander wars, map vision hacks, etc., etc., BUT INSTEAD SIDING WITH THE SAME PEOPLE DOING THOSE GRIEVOUS SINS and colluding in numerous political propaganda wars.... are people like this more likely to...
1. Scheme together a 'poor amateur me' plausible deniability strategy as a "cover" or excuse for yet another offensive operation against FCW, and actually work as an affiliate of, agent of, and defender of a parasite doing code theft to help him make legal attacks against his victim, or ...
2. Help the parasite site first for 5-10 minutes to get compliant, then approach collaboratively in back channels in a friendly way about any code or content they're interested in?

These same people could have easily made you compliant in a few minutes, but we're supposed to believe that instead they spend HOURS working on threats and legal arguments against us... In spite of screenshots where you formerly claim these people to be the most dishonest corrupt evil assholes in the whole community, we're supposed to believe that you now find them nothing but helpful in friendly, simultaneous to their continuous non-stop political offensives against us all over Discord, both public and private, with threats to doxx people, sue people, take down sites, etc.?
Are we supposed to believe that I can't even put up a new graphic on the front page of the website without these "white knights" making a public shitshow in the public forum? Do white knights really do that? I think not. Methinks they doth protest too much!

This orchestrated scandal by your cadre has an undeniable fact pattern of absolutely heinous hypocrisy and maliciousness ABSOLUTELY unwelcome within any open source project. It's shameful. Anyone who made such grievous and unethical moves as this would be better advised to quietly let it fade away and hide a little while, instead of trying to fight and die on the Hill of Hypocrisy like all of your are. Bottom line: you and your cadre of affiliated agents invested greater efforts in remaining noncompliant and pursuing public propaganda campaigns against us, then simply getting your compliant. THIS ONE FACT MAKES EVERYTHING ELSE YOU SAY OR DO ABSOLUTELY UNTRUSTWORTHY AND NOT CREDIBLE.

And you did all this AFTER breaking promised agreements with us and lying to all of our admins.

You blundered on the whole "use the Parasite Paradigm strategy while trying to flip it against the victim."

3. Anyone who carefully watched your site content, repo, public statements and public politics, could clearly see a timed pattern of deliberate efforts from you and your agents/affiliates to deliberately move you OUT OF compliance into the Parasite Paradigm. All "coincidentally" timed with perfectly planned precision. Deny it all you want, but anyone who stubbornly remains noncompliant while working with a cadre making LEGAL THREATS on someone else for code to which you have no right to, while you and your affiliates/agents resist being compliant, is DISCREDITED and obviously morally bankrupt.

4. The same people acting as your agents and affiliates who set up the site, and were aware of its noncompliance, then made licensing demands and legal threats upon us while KNOWING that the site on behalf of which they are affiliated agents, was deliberately left noncompliant. When notified we'd work with your cadre only AFTER they symmetrically handled your compliance issues first, they lost all possible excuse to pretend unawareness of your noncompliance, and proceeded to "double down" on the original strategy from the beginning, which was to use you as a pawn to attempt to degrade FCW and its operators through an orchestrated "reputation scandal."
User avatar
Canik
Veteran
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:26 am

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by Canik »

Lexxie wrote:TL;DR: Canik is not an innocent "poor little amateur" who "just tried to get compliant", but knowingly, deliberately, and wantonly engaged in a campaign to steal code from FCW and try to use that anti-competitively against us WHILE working with agents and affiliates who assisted him in orchestrated hypocritical licensing attacks against FCW that knowingly turned a blind eye to his pattern of theft and licensing violations.

Yeah, I should've just used your stable release. Sorry.
Oh wait, it didn't exist.

So I was forced to use the development version and try to make work with *very* little help from anyone else.
Not diverging was impossible and it was due to your never having your true source up, only development versions,
and your refusal to help in any way. I was on my own and had to patchwork things to make it work.

Again - if you simply had your actual working state available. A stable release. Then maybe you could complain and point fingers.
But you didn't and you can't. Because I can't be blamed for diverging under those circumstances.

By the way - the tundra overlay code that you currently run on your server does not exist on your github as far as I can see.
I checked all 3 branches.

Also the makefile.am in amplio2 is missing the additional files.
Last edited by Canik on Tue Nov 16, 2021 6:58 am, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
Canik
Veteran
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:26 am

Re: Source code for Freeciv-web running on Freecivweb.org

Post by Canik »

Lexxie wrote: TL;DR: Canik is not an innocent "poor little amateur" who "just tried to get compliant", but knowingly, deliberately, and wantonly engaged in a campaign to steal code from FCW and try to use that anti-competitively against us WHILE working with agents and affiliates who assisted him in orchestrated hypocritical licensing attacks against FCW that knowingly turned a blind eye to his pattern of theft and licensing violations.

Canik's Claim:
Struggling to get code working as you only had a broken development version available on your github not the actual state of your site.
Absolute lies.
1. A repository is not "a version" like exists on a real file system. It is an archaeological record of every version it has ever existed as. It's a simple matter of going to our last commit made before our last public release, the exact day and hour of which is well known to you.

What your site was doing was skillfully, expertly, non-amateurly, and selectively cherry picking some of our pre-release features and not others, modifying those features, and doing a hell of a lot of other very non-amateur operations. You made a decision to selectively pre-release some of our NON-RELEASE developmental code ahead of the last known release to "co-opt" or "trump" us in releasing our own celebrated launch features before us, with the flagrant audacity to imply to people some kind of superiority of your site in having our features ahead of FCW, which you misrepresented in a way to let people infer to be your own features making you competitively superior.
In fact I am still dealing with errors in the code due to this.
1. You are dealing with errors in the code due to your cadre's decision to pre-release cherrypicked parts of our unreleased server ahead of its release while ignoring and deliberately modifying other parts. Once you choose to diverge, the only one to blame is in the mirror.
I was a poor amateur just trying to get compliant though.
Yes we're already aware your failed "poor me' argument to wave the "plausible deniability" flag. Let's nuke this LIE one more time.

2. Whether you are an amateur or not is irrelevant. You must first be compliant yourself BEFORE making legal demands on your licensor. Normally when someone wants something from someone upstream from them, do you think they try hard to comply and be friendly and work it out in back channel to maintain a good relationship, or instead, break their promised agreements and go on an immediate public propaganda offensive where they stubbornly remain noncompliant WHILE setting up a cadre of skilled expert people to make public political statements and orchestrate the public view to discredit the upstream source from whom they're stealing? Yes, it's stealing when you're noncompliant and introducing your own HIDDEN FEATURES while taking the features from someone else to try to outcompete them, the dreaded "Parasite Paradigm" which is the worst capital offense in any open source project. But this, as bad as it is, isn't the worst. Let's get down to objective unarguable facts and nuke these lies DEAD.

What matters objectively is the fact that YOU BEING A NONCOMPLIANT LICENSE VIOLATOR while making licensing demands from the repository you steal from, ABSOLUTELY NUKES any shred of solid ground you have to stand on and every other argument you can ever make, period. Forever. Finito. Game over player one. You're out. Get in the doghouse. Whip your back 77 times, wear a goat hair vest, and beg humble forgiveness for your sins on your knees to the rest of the community. You, sir, are in the doghouse of shame for this stunt. Every other argument is now irrelevant.


But, just for the sake of the crowd who may wonder a little more about this "I'm just a poor amateur" theory... let's look a tiny bit under the dirt, shall we?

3. You colluded and affiliated with EXPERTS. They helped you set up the site compliantly at first. Anyone watching the site, like me, clearly saw steps and changes being made later to worth WITH you to make the site noncompliant, changing its workflow. Interesting. We were fooled into thinking these were White Knight Crusader Champions of Open Source Compliance, coming to your aid against the evil closed source Lexxie... but what does deeper investigation reveal?? That they strategised this and WANTED people to think that, while deliberately pursuing a different strategy altogether. FACT PATTERNS that they don't think people will dig deep enough to see, are the smoking gun and fingerprints of this premeditated CRIME SCENE.

Question. Do real white knight crusaders, Instead of warning you or helping you with your own noncompliance, knowingly and DELIBERATELY ASSIST YOU IN PURSUING YOUR STRATEGY OF making license demands on ANOTHER SITE while stubbornly keeping you NON-COMPLIANT? Do they, after repeated protests that your legal attacks could not be taken seriously UNTIL you were first made compliant, stubbornly refuse to first correct your own NONCOMPLIANT VIOLATIONS AND CODE THEFT in a mere several minutes? Do white knight open source crusaders stubbornly NOT do that but instead spend DAILY HOURS continuing to pursue attacks in public against us, accompanied with the full enchilada of hours of daily propaganda wars, reputation-degrading accusations, public politics, false accreditation for features, false claims and slander in almost every theatre both public and private.... harrassment, threats to doxx people, LEGAL THREATS? Wait, what's going on here? Something doesn't smell right in this "poor little amateur me" hypothesis. Wouldn't "poor little me" be asking something like "hey can someone help me get compliant so I have a right to access your code again? I want to keep a good reputation with the people whose years worth of code and features and technically I'm thieving it, so could one of you guys who is attacking Lexxie for hours a day just set me up? Thanks!" YES YOU'RE DAMNED RIGHT, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT POOR LITTLE AMATEUR ME WOULD DO! How strange, that's not at all anything like what you did. Nah, ... lies, politics, poaching, subversion, slander, orchestrated offensives with your "white knights" while stubbornly remaining noncompliant, "Red Hat Squash commits" to erase the paper trail and credits and evidence of your activities, made by mysterious people naming one huge mega-commit as "Canik is dumb", made by mysterious people who ARE NOT the same ones helping you pursuing the legal attacks to take our site down. Wait! What's going on here with this poor little amateur me" strategy? This is looks like something completely different! It smells like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck. What is it's a duck! Absolutely rotten. But whether anyone believes it or not is objectively irrelevant. Any rights you have to pursue any argument against us was absolutely nuked by the fact that you aggressively pursued licensing demands upon us for a period of weeks where you refused to first be compliant yourself.

"White knight open source crusaders helping poor little amateur me". BULL*HIT!


Final statement to the court and jury.

What kind of heinous hypocrites ALL collectively orchestrate this public offensive together, when in 5 minutes they could easily make you compliant?
Would non-biased angels of open source do all this while ignoring your non-compliance and Parasite Paradigm of code theft? Are we supposed to think this concerted effort is plausibly excused by the "poor amateur me" theory? ABSOLUTELY NOT. No poor amateur in the world who wants a good relation with the upstream source from which they took their code, would ever pursue such a heinous abomination and sin against open source ethics. Something else is going on here and I'm about to tell the enraptured audience what it really is.

What it is, is clear proof of the Parasite Paradigm we know you were pursuing. You parasitically stole code from the parent fork while hiding your own content (yes, it's STOLEN when you're deliberately noncompliant.) Make public claims of superiority over the host organism by pre-releasing their features before them, poach their users and donors from the parent-victim site, slander the host victim operators to the old loyal users who are abhorred to hear your lies, then brilliantly create a political scandal to undermine their reputation and to try to get everyone to migrate to you. Kill off the host and rise to the top as the czar. Heist complete. That was the attempted plan. Remember, the same plan you kinda allluded to when doing gunboat diplomacy and threats to me in private? Yeah, that plan.

PROBLEMA GRANDE, señor! If this ever goes legal there is something called LEGAL DISCOVERY where all your plans gets subpoena and all your chat logs, all your github logins and activities, all of it are out in public. This puts you in a stalemate where you can't make any legal attacks whatsoever anymore.

Your so-called "white knights of open source crusades" encouraged and helped you to pursue this strategy while secretly calculating to use you as a pawn in their ongoing and continuous slander and reputation wars that they inflict us with over the last three years, which you have privately complained with me about for ages BEFORE you suddenly deny it in public to everyone else the minute you made an "alliance of convenience" with the Evil Op42.

Questions for the Jury.
Sometimes the simplest he-said she-said arguments can be resolved by looking at simple FACT PATTERNS. Let's all ask ourselves this simple question to get right under the dirt and straight to the truth of what's going on here. One simple question:
Q: Do white knight open source crusaders...
1. Spend hours every day making dubious legal threats about licenses on behalf of someone who is an openly noncompliant parasite, against the very site from whom he is stealing code,
....OR....
2. Provide 10 minutes of simple help on the site they already helped set him up, to get compliant first, then approach collaboratively in back channels in a friendly way about any code or content they're interested in?

Question 2:
Are Op42 people historically known to collude in a unified anti-FCW front to attack us every single issue we've ever had, not a single time defending us against criminals who make DoS hacking attacks, spoofed login attacks, reputational slander wars, map vision hacks, etc., etc., BUT INSTEAD SIDING WITH THE SAME PEOPLE DOING THOSE GRIEVOUS SINS and colluding in numerous political propaganda wars.... are people like this more likely to...
1. Scheme together a 'poor amateur me' plausible deniability strategy as a "cover" or excuse for yet another offensive operation against FCW, and actually work as an affiliate of, agent of, and defender of a parasite doing code theft to help him make legal attacks against his victim, or ...
2. Help the parasite site first for 5-10 minutes to get compliant, then approach collaboratively in back channels in a friendly way about any code or content they're interested in?

These same people could have easily made you compliant in a few minutes, but we're supposed to believe that instead they spend HOURS working on threats and legal arguments against us... In spite of screenshots where you formerly claim these people to be the most dishonest corrupt evil assholes in the whole community, we're supposed to believe that you now find them nothing but helpful in friendly, simultaneous to their continuous non-stop political offensives against us all over Discord, both public and private, with threats to doxx people, sue people, take down sites, etc.?
Are we supposed to believe that I can't even put up a new graphic on the front page of the website without these "white knights" making a public shitshow in the public forum? Do white knights really do that? I think not. Methinks they doth protest too much!

This orchestrated scandal by your cadre has an undeniable fact pattern of absolutely heinous hypocrisy and maliciousness ABSOLUTELY unwelcome within any open source project. It's shameful. Anyone who made such grievous and unethical moves as this would be better advised to quietly let it fade away and hide a little while, instead of trying to fight and die on the Hill of Hypocrisy like all of your are. Bottom line: you and your cadre of affiliated agents invested greater efforts in remaining noncompliant and pursuing public propaganda campaigns against us, then simply getting your compliant. THIS ONE FACT MAKES EVERYTHING ELSE YOU SAY OR DO ABSOLUTELY UNTRUSTWORTHY AND NOT CREDIBLE.

And you did all this AFTER breaking promised agreements with us and lying to all of our admins.

You blundered on the whole "use the Parasite Paradigm strategy while trying to flip it against the victim."

3. Anyone who carefully watched your site content, repo, public statements and public politics, could clearly see a timed pattern of deliberate efforts from you and your agents/affiliates to deliberately move you OUT OF compliance into the Parasite Paradigm. All "coincidentally" timed with perfectly planned precision. Deny it all you want, but anyone who stubbornly remains noncompliant while working with a cadre making LEGAL THREATS on someone else for code to which you have no right to, while you and your affiliates/agents resist being compliant, is DISCREDITED and obviously morally bankrupt.

4. The same people acting as your agents and affiliates who set up the site, and were aware of its noncompliance, then made licensing demands and legal threats upon us while KNOWING that the site on behalf of which they are affiliated agents, was deliberately left noncompliant. When notified we'd work with your cadre only AFTER they symmetrically handled your compliance issues first, they lost all possible excuse to pretend unawareness of your noncompliance, and proceeded to "double down" on the original strategy from the beginning, which was to use you as a pawn to attempt to degrade FCW and its operators through an orchestrated "reputation scandal."
^ tl;dr - Lexxie spews tons of false claims and propaganda. read this thread in full for the truth.

I, for one, was serious when I said I was tired of spending 4 hours a day on this.
Post Reply