[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [POLL][VOTE] Sponsors & Funding

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2025, 11:20 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, <
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:

> Hi Ronald
>
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2025 at 05:05:44PM -0400, Ronald S. Bultje via
> ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 11:01 AM Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel <
> > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The number of people voting was a bit disappointing but
> >
> >
> > I can't speak for others, but I saw the vote request and didn't find it
> > very serious.
> >
>
> > What I mean with that is: in a regular vote, there's typically two (or
> > sometimes more) opposing sides (e.g. parties, people, opinions) that both
> > believe they are the best option in the set of available options. Each
> side
> > can argue for its own case and voters can make an informed choice after a
> > fruitful and informative debate. (I know this is somewhat idealized.)
> >
> > You covered the "yes" side (something about collecting sponsorship money
> > into SPI), but nobody made any counter-argument against "yes", e.g. for
> the
> > "no" side. Does this mean nobody supported "no" to begin with and it was
> a
> > strawman in a vote? Whose "side" was the "no" supposed to cover? Who was
> > the proponent of the "no", or more generally: who was not on the "yes"
> side
> > and was the reason for the need-to-vote?
>
> i asked 3 weeks before the vote for comments
> 0909 10:19 Michael Niederm (2.6K) [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Sponsors & Funding
> and certainly people did take it serious.
>
> The alternative to my proposal was to leave things as they are, thats
> the "default". Noone proposed another option, and that should not be an
> issue because
> people could have voted "no" and presented an alternative later.
>
> I would have preferred alot, if there where more votes
>
> But worse is, if we forever have everything stuck. (and i think you
> actually
> agree on that)
>
> and if you read your mail.
> You seem not concerned about Funding
> You seem not concerned about FFmpegs future
> You seem not concerned about teh Team
> You seem not concerned about competitors
> You seem not concerned about FFmpeg developers we are loosing (because we
> have no
> way to pay them and they dont want or cant be volunteers forever)
>
> It seems you are concerned, that a decission was made, and not even one
> you seem
> to strongly disagree with, so I dont know. Iam a bit confused.
>
> Iam concerned about FFmpegs future if we cannot overcome these internal
> issues.
>
> I think we should try to regularly chat with each other to better
> understand
> each other. I dont know exactly but what you say sounds like there are
> some misunderstandings here.
>

Have a proper GA vote then.
If you want to rant about why the GA is rigged or whatever, then why is
your single vote in what is clearly a shambolic "vote" worth more than a
proper GA vote?

And now your usual approach of attacking people who disagree with you. (see
SDR, STF etc)

Kieran

>
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org