B
B. R. 'BeAr' Ederson
Susan posted earlier that she is willing to pay for a new domain and
hosting, but would prefer the "ownership" be of more than one person and
not to include her. The intent, as I understand it, is an effort to
ensure the site will live on should Susan become unable to continue for
whatever reason. Hey, we all have personal lives and who knows what will
happen tomorrow.
The more I follow the discussions, the stronger I believe R. L. and
some others are right: After such controversies we shouldn't head for
one 'official' site hosting the PL. Every group or entity can (and
should) create its own, if it pleases. The 'true reference' is not
(and never was, in fact) a website. The results are published and
agreed upon within acf.
But if we don't support a *singular* site, then there is no need to
split responsibility for domain, website, and design/content. All
three should be in one hand. Supporters can show their consent by
offering help (for the work to be done) and by donating money.
So it is up to everybody or every group to settle down possibilities
for participation and sponsoring. The person who owns the domain
and the site has all rights and no duties. So it entails the same
situation as with donationware: We reward past work and further
expectations by our support. But we can do nothing if a project is
abandoned. If need comes, *all* rights could be transferred in a
*single* step, if the person who owns them is inclined to do so.
At least there would be no dispute around access rights and such,
anymore...
BeAr