jimtabor's accusations

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

jimtabor
Developer
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:00 pm

Post by jimtabor » Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:49 pm

GvG wrote: I didn't stand up to Casper because I agreed with him. Never made a secret about that. In fact, up to this day I still agree with the actions Casper took.

So how much money did you make working for Casper?

Thanks,
James

GvG
Posts: 499
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:50 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by GvG » Sat Aug 25, 2007 10:16 pm

jimtabor wrote:So how much money did you make working for Casper?
Uhm, that would be exactly 0.00 Euro, which might have something to do with the fact that he never hired me. Not for something ReactOS/Windows-compatible-OS related, not for anything else.

You keep insisting that there was some dark conspiracy to steal your code and that Casper and myself were part of that conspiracy. Usually, conspiracy theorists offer at least some proof, but so far you have only come up with a link to Caspers company website (which, by the way, doesn't contain any info about a Windows-compatible-OS). Oh noes, Casper owns a company! Surely he must be Evil! I'll let you in on a little secret: I run my own company too! Two people, both running their own little Evil Companies, and they agreed on the copyright issue! That can't be a coincidence, can it? Surely that's all the proof anyone would need to recognize that there was a Dark Conspiracy?

In case the sarcasm in the last paragraph went over your head: please provide evidence or stop accusing people.


jimtabor
Developer
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:00 pm

Post by jimtabor » Sat Aug 25, 2007 10:35 pm

GvG wrote:
jimtabor wrote:So how much money did you make working for Casper?
Uhm, that would be exactly 0.00 Euro, which might have something to do with the fact that he never hired me. Not for something ReactOS/Windows-compatible-OS related, not for anything else.

You keep insisting that there was some dark conspiracy to steal your code and that Casper and myself were part of that conspiracy. Usually, conspiracy theorists offer at least some proof, but so far you have only come up with a link to Caspers company website (which, by the way, doesn't contain any info about a Windows-compatible-OS). Oh noes, Casper owns a company! Surely he must be Evil! I'll let you in on a little secret: I run my own company too! Two people, both running their own little Evil Companies, and they agreed on the copyright issue! That can't be a coincidence, can it? Surely that's all the proof anyone would need to recognize that there was a Dark Conspiracy?

In case the sarcasm in the last paragraph went over your head: please provide evidence or stop accusing people.

That is so funny! What make you think it is a conspiracy? Did I say it was?

Thanks,
James

GvG
Posts: 499
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:50 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by GvG » Sat Aug 25, 2007 10:59 pm

Are we going to play word games now? Ok, I'll play along one round.
jimtabor wrote:This is an analyses of the events accruing year prior, days before and days after the audit started. It is a subject of understanding that more than two groups where working for self interests for some type of financial gain.
To me, this sounds like you're claiming there was a conspiracy.

Can we stop playing word games now and get back to the issue: when are you going to show evidence that I was part of one of "two groups working for self interests for some type of financial gain"?
BTW, I'd be very very surprised if Casper and Hartmut had any financial gain from ReactOS, I expect that it was a money sink for them too. Of course I can't be completely sure of that, since I can't look into their wallets.

jimtabor
Developer
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:00 pm

Post by jimtabor » Sat Aug 25, 2007 11:06 pm

GvG wrote: Can we stop playing word games now and get back to the issue: when are you going to show evidence that I was part of one of "two groups working for self interests for some type of financial gain"?
Need to read it again. It is a subject of understanding that more than two groups where working for self interests for some type of financial gain Hum? I did not see your name anywhere in there. I never specified the groups did I?

Thanks,
James

GvG
Posts: 499
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:50 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by GvG » Sat Aug 25, 2007 11:10 pm

More word games. Sorry, I only play one round.

Gé.

jimtabor
Developer
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:00 pm

Post by jimtabor » Sat Aug 25, 2007 11:14 pm

GvG wrote:More word games. Sorry, I only play one round.

Gé.
Ge!

Thank you very much and your cooperation. You have already answered my questions.
James

GvG
Posts: 499
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:50 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by GvG » Sat Aug 25, 2007 11:32 pm

jimtabor wrote:You have already answered my questions.
Wish I could say the same. Still waiting for the answer to my repeated question "please provide evidence that I gained financial benefit from ReactOS (or from leaving the project)". Of course I'm not surprised that you haven't provided such evidence, since it cannot exist. I would have had a lot more respect for you if you just admitted you made a mistake instead of playing silly word games.

Gé.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Sun Aug 26, 2007 5:00 am

Jimtabor just Please just admit your mistake.

GPL does not require public release of code being used or inspected internally. So you code was not exactly stolen. It turns out the the wording of GPL allows distribution of all forms to be stopped without notice or vote in case of suspected infringement. Please understand the license you agreed to when you submitted your code. Yes it pays to keep you own backups.

Nothing in the rules back then said that a svn required a vote or notice of close.

As I say we all have made mistakes handling this. GvG made mistakes. Jimtabor is making mistakes over agreed to license.

We need to move forward. Its time to repair bridges. If GvG wants to return lot of use have no problems with it. He expressed his point of view and got burned badly for it. Lot of us owe GvG a sorry for our lack of torrence. That is fair this place is not a dictatorship of course the idea has to be workable.

forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: jimtabor's accusations

Post by forart » Sun Aug 26, 2007 10:33 am

jimtabor wrote:Money was the key word here.
Well, i can't understand so mutch: where's the problem ?
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.

chorns
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:47 am

Post by chorns » Sun Aug 26, 2007 11:30 pm

Wow, Jim, you really need someone to blame for the mess. Well, it's alright, I don't need you to like me, but you will confuse many other people who read your claims. Like GvG, I will encourage you to provide evidence for your claims. Here is a bit of clarification for anyone interrested:

I did not and still do not profit financially from ReactOS. You can even see my website http://www.eudicon.com that there is no mention of ReactOS. We do IT-consulting for other businesses - mostly .NET and Oracle. Get a grip, Jim. Do you honestly think anyone would pay money for ReactOS in it's current state? It can't even boot on many machines, and every release is buggy as hell, and isn't able to do much for many people. ReactOS is a hobby project (and mostly a fun one), and it will be no more than that for quite a while. ReactOS is no where near a commercial quality product. I SPENT money on ReactOS instead. I bought the rack server to host the repository and Continuous Integration/revision building system. It cost me $3300 in 2004, and the hosting for 2 years cost me $2000. That is $5300 spent on ReactOS from 2004-2006.

What I got from ReactOS was EXPERIENCE. I put at least 4000 hours into ReactOS from 1999 to 2006. That is a lot of work, but I did it because it was fun. So you claim I wanted to ruin the project? No! But I didn't want to have illegal code in ReactOS or even host illegal code on my server. So, you are mad I disabled anonymous access for a few days? Well, you were not the person legally responsible for the contents in the repository which (at the time) might contain illegal code. I was!

The illegal code is still in the repository, but you just don't want to see it...because it don't suit your goals. You claim I tried to delete the repository. I've got all the posts on the ros-priv mailing list in my mailbox to prove you wrong. Just let me know if your claim is still valid, and I will put the e-mails up for download for everyone to see. You probably won't like what else information is in there, because it doesn't suit your goals of ignoring the facts and keeping the public not knowing about them.

Do the right thing, Jim. Rewrite the illegal code. I know it's hard to rewrite complex assembly code and only a few people are able to do it and it's time consuming, but it's the RIGHT THING TO DO!

chorns
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:47 am

Post by chorns » Sun Aug 26, 2007 11:33 pm

jimtabor wrote:
GvG wrote: I didn't stand up to Casper because I agreed with him. Never made a secret about that. In fact, up to this day I still agree with the actions Casper took.

So how much money did you make working for Casper?

Thanks,
James
Get help, Jim. By help, I mean professional help. $200/hour shrinks. I'm sure they can remove the ghosts you are seeing...

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Mon Aug 27, 2007 1:47 am

Please Look at the locked files chorns. http://www.reactos.org/generated/locked_files.log

Most what is left is C files that source cannot be determined. Ie cannot find author or find any matching sources.

Most of the suspected asm ones were under a valid license from Microsoft to use legally use just they were tagged wrong. If people had done there homework correctly off the start line lots of problems could have been avoided. Not one person in the mess did everything right.

I hold nothing against you chorns for closing the repository. Main point is GPL clearly allowed you to do such a action. Section 7 to be truthful. In case of something being wrong person has the right to stop distribution. As long as they truly stop distribution of it. Its the integrity clause of GPL.

It does concern me that jimtabor did not understand the effects of this clause in the GPL licence.

Jimtabor of course look back to learn how everyone screwed up. Most people were doing what they thought was the correct thing to do. The bigger problem was the project of Reactos had no policies to handle that kind of event. so wild west broke out. Developers like you Jimtabor were left in dark. Some people took actions that they though was required to save there own skin. I cannot blame a person for that it was panic.

I still think a Official history laying down each persons motivations, panic and mistakes. Note the Official History would be a good thing to check current policy against to make sure it could stop that from repeating. Lot of people here are just guilt of being humans and fighting with each other in criss. Said to say its the normal human thing to do.

Betov
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 10:53 am

Post by Betov » Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:02 am

Most what is left is C files that source cannot be determined. Ie cannot find author or find any matching sources.

Most of the suspected asm ones were under a valid license from Microsoft to use legally use just they were tagged wrong.
Two remarks, here:

1) The Assembly pirated files were not in the locked list. They passed magically through, showing that the Audit was, clearly, dummy, and had no purpose but to set a curtain of smoke on the event at its origines.

2) You (the ReactOS team) attacked me for 3 months because i was pointing to them. You did your best to ruin my reputation. You succeeded, by conspiration, to get the Wikipedia Page of RosAsm being removed. You never admitted there was a "problem", until i had no other choice but to make the evidences public.
the integrity clause of GPL
So, "integrity" is a word that you should refrain from using. You have made the demonstration that you want to have non-GPLed code inside, at any cost. And the reason one is known: The name is "20 millions dollars, baby".

About money making from a Project like this one, the process is well known, and is based on reputation making. First, fame, second, money. Was it not 100% clear with Alex Ionescu example?


Betov.

forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart » Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:35 am

As always, money is the PROBLEM.

I think we have to learn from (`completely unrelated links removed by moderator').

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 1 guest