Do you have any example from the past where *all you got* was a "stop pestering" response? I don't mean "stop pestering" alone, it happens sometimes, but if I haven't missed anything it was always related to something like "but your questions were already answered".

I agree and I do all my best to always provide such explanations - and mostly because I'm also interested in decisions like that and reasoning behind them, I would surely push Joerg and Nikolaus to answer. I would, in case something like that happened - but so far they were the ones always reasoning their stuff properly without me even asking, so I don't have anything to complain about yet

But I'm pretty sure that what I said above (about GDC internal assets) was actually repeated from what I saw earlier stated publicly.

There are various definitions of Open Hardware. "100% open" could mean "you can use it without single line of non-open software"; it could mean also "we provide you schematics and datasheets", it could mean also "we provide you complete kit with everything necessary to start production of your own clone".

From my perspective, looks like Neo900 will be somewhere between the last two. The still open question is - where exactly.

Our denies were related to the situation where we simply ask preorderers if we can transfer their orders to Neo900 UG. That was not possible, so technically orders had to be cancelled - but now it opens the possibility for direct transfer of the refunds to the UG and it should be easily possible with non-CC orders. We're also pondering about solutions for people who paid with CC.

This is the difference in accounting - "order transfer" vs. "refund". If we're extremely lucky, maybe donors won't be even able to tell the difference from their point of view.

It changed recently, so it could be simply out-of-date. But I don't think it could be "few days ago". Or even if it could, the fact is that right now I feel much more confident about everything I say without consultation than, say, month ago (but that doesn't mean that I wasn't confident back then of course )

Possibly - Joerg is not greatest and best in communication skills, that's for sure - but I think having him active here brings more benefits than drawbacks anyway.

Well, it's not our objective to convince FSF on anything. They themselves are pretty aware that in case of hardware, the line of what's acceptable for them and what's not in openness is pretty arbitrary. I never seen FSF requiring any "project files" for hardware available to get their blessing; they are mostly interested in software that runs on blessed hardware, and to set a limit on "what's still a software, and what's already a hardware" (which is very tricky to answer properly) they ensure their "non-replacable firmware" rule.

Our objective is to show, that our design does not need to follow that rule in order to respect freedom and privacy of the user.

Sure Even if positive attitude seems to be dominating, I can see that there indeed is some kind of tension, or doubt, in the community thanks to - let's say it - our recent f*ck ups, and I perfectly understand that. So I try to make it all clear as much as I can, and to learn something from past mistakes.