<blockquote class='postbody'>Some clarification seems to be needed here.<br />
<br />
[quote]We as users are left to make up our mind in absence of any Administartive policy weather we should trust any project and in deed weather they are doing what they are doing is legal and legitimate. The BOINC software and the Berkely administration will not admit to control the use of the software and any Tom, Dick and Henry can start a project because the Management Committe does not care who uses the software and for what purposes. </blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote class='postbody'>BOINC is open source, anyone can create their own project for their own purpose and it is up to them to create a community around their project. Nothing has changed there. You, as a contributor, decide your level of trust and involvement in <u>any</u> BOINC project, always. UCB may stop at <i>endorsing</i> any particular project, but they certainly never controlled any of them. PMC/BMC would act no differently there.</blockquote><br />
<br />
That is a fair enough answer for it is documented so. I wish to point out though that to date the BOINC System and that is the Software Component and Documemntation was controlled by one person. There was no clear process of review. There was no community involvement or need to find a consensus of the user. This was a Dictatorial system. Therefore the public was duped. Now that David Anderson is no longer getting paid, he is too busy managing other interests and he passed the controlling management to his friends that helped him before. He said: Boinc has transitioned to a Community based Governance and in his documents he has referred to a Community Based Consensus. What he did not say is that the members of the Project Management Committee is appointed by him without Community consensus. As stated by one of the PMC members, they are not empowered to deal with questions of Day to Day problems and questions and we will not get an answer from the PMC on such questions. Yet David stated that Committers have no more authpority than contributers the question is begged to be asked who included statement in the documentation and why? Oh, hang on users not supposed to know that, users do not need to know that, all thay have to do is download the software and use it.<br />
<br />
I submit this is just my point of view. Just a few days ago David was interviewed on UTube and unless I am blind and dumb, I could have sworn that he said that BOINC was created to help in Scientific Research. He never mentioned that anybody including Terrorist Organisation may use it for it is an Open In frastructure Software with no rules. If such thing happens it will not be the fault of the software for BOINC passed responsibility for using to the user neither BOINC or the University of Berkely is responsible for anything in the software or its documentation. I beleive that is one basis for discussion alone.<br />
<br />
I sir am not dumb and neither am I a sheep. The backbone of the New Governing system is in place. Now is the time to voice your opinion if you do not like what is going on for David stated that input is welcome (at some place that I have no time to find at the moment) you should find the link in this thread. I have said my point of view there as was requested. I am not demanding anything. I am just a voice crying out in the wildreness. I can offer suggestions but that is only one users opinion. What I do ask is that if anybody asks a question there please give some indication when may we receive an answer. I do not need an immediate reply, an idication would be nice for i might just think that it will never be answered. If you look at any good software support system if you ask a question, the system will give a reference number and tells you that a reply will be provided in a certain number of hours, days, months or years as needed. I am refering to the questions Jord asked. Some questions were answered with a question and I am still curious what is the official reply that was asked for it effects me as well.<br />
<br />
What I am upset about is that BOINC is not transparent. It hides elements from the public view and makes decisions without Community consensus or awarness. Only 26 members of the Community at large have read the admin_list since it was started 17 days ago. Why wern't we asked what should be included in the Governing Document? Why PMC appointments made without consultation? We are not even introduced who they are and what their responsibilities are? Stakeholders are not informed because I am told this is a Software Development Committee. Since David has handed over responsibility am I to trust faceless individuals who only care about the code of the software. Who makes documentary statements and desitions, another group of faceless people. No, it can't be for Jord asked this question. A PMC members said that it is made by the contributors and Committers. David states that conmmitters have no more authority than contributors. Than who is the authority who already included this in the documentations. There is no appointed committee that is open and transparent. A PMC memebrs states that it is up to the committesr and contributors. Now, hang on, I was appointed by David to manage the list of known BOINC Project List and he stated manage it as you see fit. That makes me a committer by the terminology used that means I do not need to aks anybody, I can just go ahead and make a rule without consultation. Is this the intention. I submit the PMC needs a lot of work and clarification for this is not a professional system that one should trust and waste money on. The venue has been set. go ahead and voice your opinion at the appointed list. I am not asking or demanding anything here, I am just generalizing.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class='postbody'>Time to search out other Scientific project based software issued by other Universities that runs Non BOINC but Sientific projects like Folding and numerous others. Leave BOINC to gamers or any individual who wishes volunteers to donate their computers for unknown reasons.</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote class='postbody'>Yup, you possess the absolute freedom to do that, any time you so choose. You always have had that freedom.</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote class='postbody'>We have a good Offical Forum to discuss matter relating to BOINC but the management tries to keep us in the dark by running numerous obscure lists and offside group discussion in Google for example.</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote class='postbody'>I think this criticism is both unfounded and unfair. I have no doubt that this has been an incredibly difficult time for the project team and I believe that they have done what they deemed best, given that the financial rug supporting this project has been pulled out from under them. Google groups is cheap and available internationally and unencumbered by UCB list access/permission policy. What's the better alternative than Google?</blockquote><br />
<br />
I bag to differ on this but I respect your views. What was the need to hurry and why was this such a difficult time. They all had the same time as Einstein or Houdini. What we need is community involvment not just a system of Dictatorship. A critical review of decision is needed in order to create a software and suitable documentation that suits most stakeholders. But as I said before, I am just one voice. You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class='postbody'> It is working. 97% of the community said nothing in eleven days. Is it because they do not care or is it because it was intended to be hidden?[/url]</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote class='postbody'>I suspect that the majority of the community (your 97%) doesn't even need to know and probably wouldn't even notice. They are users. They download a client, connect, crunch, get help from the message boards if necessary. Not many of them interact at the BOINC co-ordinator level. They interact with their project and project administrators. As long as there's a binary download or their repository contains a client, what more do they really need to know? This is one of the intrinsic benefits of BOINC, a simple interface to a highly complex and hidden ecosystem.</blockquote><br />
<br />
I am sorry I disagree. I joined BOINC at the time of SETI Classic for I was under the impression that by allowing somebody to enter my computer I need to trust them. That trust is not easy to come by when you are being duped that the software was designed to help Scientific research and by the fact that it runs a BOINC Software it has certain inbuilt method to keep out unwanted individuals. I obviously was misinformed and misdirected. As stated earlier David on UTube emphasized Scientific research yet we had users before, now and no doubt in the future who used the software for personal use. BOINC Condones this. The idea is good and we are let to believe that we are protected to some extent yet almost everyday a professional Antivirus system states that beware this software is not trusted. I Joined because friends of my compatriots who I left behind come home sick and Died of Cancer. I have family members who have died of cancer and Muscular dystrophy. I am paying $200.00 a week plus for Electricity just to allow my machines for used for scientific research be it finding a cure for illnesses or finding Extraterrestrials in the Universe. I want a simnple software that I can trust to use for such purpose and we as users should have an input what we need. What we do not need is backing people who runs project for unknown reasons or use it for spam begging for donations to pay a university student to deliver A poster outside the campus or run a project that does nothing but issues credit. I do not understand how your complex hidden ecosystem fits in this debate.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class='postbody'> The remainder (your 3%) that are discussing this will be sufficiently motivated to engage further, which they are doing and the new Governance structure will accommodate that.</blockquote>