Jason Scott's VCF Donation

[cjs]

Having literally been there when the donation was made, it was clear that this was odds and ends that had long ago been checked for archiving.

So where are the archived versions of all this material?

Does anyone really think it would have been donated to a warehouse without climate control by the ocean if there was any hint of archiving needed?

So was VCF making it clear that all the stuff they accepted was going into a warehouse in a salt air environment that has (or just had?) no climate control? Particularly for vintage computer equipment rather than documents? I'm not familiar with the exact situation, of course, but it seems to me that if the conditions at that warehouse were as bad as you describe, the VCF should not have been storing computer equipment there, yet it sounds like they accepted a lot of computer equipment and did store it there for significant lengths of time.

 

[Timo W.]

According to amichlin on the Hacker News site linked in #3:
"The collection was popular computer magazines that have long ago been archived. Nothing unique, which is likely why the donation was made in the first place. The blog post implies there was something unique about this donation. There was not."

Everyone with that kind of attitude should not be part of any retro community. I don't even know where to start to tell what all is so wrong in those statements. It's just sad.

 

[amichlin]

Maybe I missed it, but I don't see what the actual agreement was regarding the donation (from either side). This is a key piece of information. Since Jason is omitting it, this leads me to believe that there was no agreement, and his donation was unconditional. He made a reasonable, but incorrect assumption that it would be archived. So while I can understand why he is upset, I also don't think he has the right to be upset.

The agreement was the stuff would be stored so it didn't have to be trashed. I've checked with other people active at the time and they have confirmed that Jason donated nothing that was unarchived. I personally went through much of the stuff as I wasn't sure of that at the time. I can't recall what was his donation and what was hundreds of other donations, but the only things thrown away were modern things thrown into the mix and even then only after a year of asking people to take anything and everything. You might be amazed at what people put in donation boxes.

This was a pot shot timed to disrupt an event. I say this because I tried to resolve the matter almost immediately and privately. As per:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1778492673113936007

Adam Michlin

@amichlin

I'm am no longer attending Vintage Computer Festivals, but for different reasons.With that said, there's another side to this story which I'm happy to share privately so you can decide whether to share publicly.

 

[VileR]

I offered to privately explain what really happened on Twitter (X) and was blocked as a result and made out to be accusing OP of being a liar.

Somehow that doesn't surprise me one bit. Par for the course, as I suspect others would realize if they're familiar with the individual in question.

Internet clout is a hell of a drug.

 

[philpem]

Either way, pointing out that Jason Scott has possibly done something wrong is best done by talking to Jason Scott.

I'm not sure I'd recommend that, given @amichlin's experience and my own. Hopefully someone can get through to him.

I offered to privately explain what really happened on Twitter (X) and was blocked as a result and made out to be accusing OP of being a liar. I only want to interject the facts as I know them and maybe offer up a couple of opinions.

I've had the same experience, sadly. I've no involvement but tried to suggest to Jason in a semi-private venue (Discord) that it might be an idea to step back and take stock. Specifically I highlighted my experience volunteering and that posting on the first day of VCF might come off badly (I was assuming good faith at this point).
I got the same response @amichlin had: insulted, then he replied to say I could "leave one response in the form of an emote only before I was removed from the server"...

I should add the server had no posted rules so I assumed basic politeness applied - i.e. don't repeat anything which wasn't already public. And Jason had already posted the link publicly in several places, including news websites. The link to the Discord chat had also been posted publicly in the past, by Jason.

From what I've heard from several unrelated people since, he deleted his entire reaction, and is now claiming that I was removed from the server for "leaking his messages publicly, which is against the rules of the server" - the simple fact is, the only "message" I "leaked" was a link to his blog post [edit: see clarification below], which was included as part of the "reply to:" block...

Edit for accuracy:
I've checked the screenshots I tweeted: one was Jason posting a link to his blog post, with the text "This is getting hilarious" below the link preview. I hadn't noticed that text until now (I stopped reading at the link preview).
The second screenshot is my message, which Discord showed as a reply to "This is getting hilarious".
I don't know what specifically was hilarious, and I'm not going to speculate.
End edit.

People can make up their own minds here.

Internet clout is a hell of a drug.

Isn't it just.

 

[Unknown_K]

The problem with the internet is people can post faster than they can think, which can be a problem when you are mad or off your meds.

I am not saying the original poster is right or wrong, just that he should have cooled down a bit and looked deeper into the issue before posting. If he has taken down those posts, he probably regrets making them.

 

[cjs]

...and that posting on the first day of VCF might come off badly (I was assuming good faith at this point).

Really? What was your alternative proposal for a time to post, and how does that compare to his reasons for posting at the time he did?

 

[qwerty123]

When it was donated, the policy was take everything that anyone wanted to donate.

That's a lie and you know it.

I had NO intention of getting involved in this discussion, until you lied and insulted me with your historical revisionism.

It was donated when I was in charge and we had a pretty reliable policy at that point to take only what we really needed or what was too good to pass up. You can disagree with my decision to take that particular donation, but the truth is, most offerings were politely declined.

You were too busy as the new guy / outsider, trying to tell me how to do my job. It sounds like you still prefer running your know-it-all mouth, than listening.

So YOU are the one who needs to shut up and hear the facts from the people who were actually making decisions back then.

-Evan

 

[Apprentice57]

Full disclosure, I registered to write this and only loosely follow Jason and VCF. Feel free to disregard me on those grounds.

It is pretty clear here that at the minimum there were issues/breakdown in communications on VCFs side. Both in not contacting Jason before the materials were redistributed (I will offer charity and assume that's indeed what happened) incase he wanted them back, and additionally in telling Jason they were in fact destroyed.

Is that a huge deal? Not particularly from where I'm standing. Especially if VCF is willing to take a (small) mea culpa for the communication breakdown, at least explain what happened, and how the organization has grown in the interim. If they can do so without pointing fingers at Jason (even if in your opinion it is justified) it would come off very well.

What is not a good argument is to bring up the intra-VCF distinctions. This *was* a disagreement with VCF East/Jason Scott, but it *also* reflects badly on the organization as a whole, including the other sub groups because there's a unified brand. It is annoying to see such an unpersuasive point made multiple times. It is a distraction from the issue at hand.

I am also generally not impressed by the reaction from ex or current VCF volunteers/members/whatever in this forum and elsewhere. Like saying those who disagree are "ignoring logic" or that Jason is just stirring up "unnecessary drama", or that the donation didn't matter and was just an attempt to find free storage for unimportant magazines. Perhaps I'm not the best judge, but when I contrast that to Jason's more sober explanation, and even if allowing for the potential that he is exaggerating, he comes across as the more reasonable party.

I also do not like Jason's trigger happy blocking/banning behavior. But on the limited point of if it indicates bad faith: it does not. He is well known for this behavior in response to any pushback to everyone. The timing also does not indicate bad faith, it's plausible that is coming about because he was getting asked about attending VCF ahead of the event.

 

[CommanderCochrane]

After some consideration and research, I've reached the conclusion I will be deleting my account here provided there is such a function on the site. If there is no such function here let this serve as my official request for my account to be permanently banned from this site at the earliest convenience of the next administrator to see this post.

For the record, I think Jason Scott has slightly over-exaggerated the severity of the issue here and I strongly suspect neither side really has the full picture as to what happened (and likely won't considering the primary interaction seems to be people blocking each other right now), but I also after digging into the nature of VCF and recounting my own limited experiences with it and people who exist in the VCF orbit agree that VCF has been infected by the plague that is monetary motivation. How this was handled was completely unacceptable, and more proof of this conclusion.

Modern retro computing has been commercialized, to where the big organizations are no longer primarily concerned with the preservation of history or making retro computing more accessible. Instead they are concerned with positioning themselves to be the leaders of the market when retro computing inevitably becomes the next retro gaming phenomenon with millions of dollars floating around in the market. Lots of people in the retro computing space are actively enabling this, hoping they can someday sell all their hoarded tech for hundreds of thousands of dollars and retire. I have no doubt soon the "investor" types will show up and find some way to put retro computing into a plastic brick like they do with graded video games so their value can "appreciate" while failing to realize the true value of anything retro is to experience the past by interacting with it.

 

[vwestlife]

Since VCF is a 501(c)3 that is collecting monetary donations and enjoying tax benefits, I think there needs to be more accountability and less finger-pointing. If the excuse is that there are people and events using the VCF name without having any official association with the non-profit organization, then why not trademark the name and crack down on those who use it without permission?

 

[mbbrutman]

As though spending money now to get the trademark would improve anything? Sellam didn't get the trademark when he needed to decades ago, and other people used the name. At this point there is no point in getting a trademark, and it would not be possible given how diluted the name is. Nobody owns the letters "VCF" and it is better that way.

Just a gentle reminder ... let's keep this thread on topic, even if it is painful to read. Threads are cheap and if people want to explore the history of VCF (all of them), the VCFed governance structure, etc. then start new threads. All threads must remain civil.

On a personal note, I was the main moderator here for years, I served on the national VCFed board for about 4 years, and I ran two VCF Events (VCF PNW in 2018 and 2019). Nobody is doing this for the money; everybody is a volunteer. Volunteers are great and help promote the mission, which truly is preservation and education. But volunteers make mistakes, have differing levels of commitment, sometimes have different opinions, etc. When there are salaries involved it's much easier to demand consistency, but nobody at VCFed has that luxury. So people chip in and do what they can and overall it's amazing how far it has come and how well it works. If people want to see how it works, get involved.

 

[cjs]

At this point there is no point in getting a trademark, and it would not be possible given how diluted the name is. Nobody owns the letters "VCF" and it is better that way.

Yes, it seems clear that there's no possibility of trademarking "VCF" now that a half dozen different organisations have been using it for years.

This, again, is an area where VCF people could communicate better. It appears to me that a lot of people didn't know that this upcoming events list:

is listing five different, unconnected organisations, and vcfed.org/about/ gives no indication that it's just one of many "VCF" organisations, either.

And perhaps if all the "VCF" folks would make a greater effort to distinguish the organisations people wouldn't take posts like Jason Scott's, which in retrospect appears to be talking only about VCF East, as talking about all the VCFs.

But volunteers make mistakes, have differing levels of commitment, sometimes have different opinions, etc. When there are salaries involved it's much easier to demand consistency, but nobody at VCFed has that luxury. So people chip in and do what they can and overall it's amazing how far it has come and how well it works. If people want to see how it works, get involved.

I suspect most people don't have huge issues with VCF making mistakes, so long as they own up to them and work to improve. (This is my position.) But as the say, "it's not the crime, it's the cover-up." When people in positions of responsibility with the VCF at the time respond with things such as, "Nothing in this blog post is factual," that seems to me to be setting up for a brouhaha.

 

[werdna]

I'm just speaking as an outsider here so take what I say with a grain of salt, but I just have to question how important this donation really was if years were waited until inquiring about the state of the items. I agree Jason's post seems to be a deliberate attempt to disrupt VCF east - the tone of the post is hostile, and the timing was clearly intentional. Replies and responses to his post seem to be a combination of knee jerk reactions, ad-hominem attacks, dramatic ultimatums, and insinuations of greed, kickbacks, and encroachment of commercialization. Ultimately, if there are organizational issues within VCF - and I'm not trying to say there are none - then this hostile rhetoric will not contribute to fixing them, and might only make things worse.

I also think that without knowing the exact details of any contract, agreement, or conditions for the donation, it's difficult to say much more. If there was none, or if there was just an expectation that the donations would be handled a certain way, then it doesn't really matter what happened to them at this point. There's always going to be overflow that any organization won't be able to handle.

Also, I've seen comments in a couple places regarding IEEE's strict enforcement of their copyrights. I'm not as familiar with how IEEE handles that, but if it's true then many of those materials were probably not able to be archived and uploaded in the first place, and so complaining that they were lost given away is irrelevant.

For the cynics out there, my other thread in this section of the forum was not created as some sort of response to this to prop-up VCF - I only posted it there because it was over the forum profile status character limit. I know I'm not obligated to defend my own postings here, but I know people are upset, and I want to be open about what I'm posting and why.

In the end, this whole thing just reeks of pointless internet drama. Things get lost, donations get screwed up, shit happens... but for goodness sake it's not the end of the world. This entire drama is unprofessional and childish. We're talking about old computers. This isn't food aid money for a starving country getting stolen by corrupt officials.

Just to relay a similar story that happened to me personally... there's a TON of old vintage computing systems, accessories, and other things that I had in storage somewhere that a close family member was supposed to pick up when we weren't going to have that space anymore. It was a lot of stuff and had a bunch of value. Almost all of it is lost now. What do you want me to do? Disown that family member? Because frankly, I also didn't make it perfectly clear to that family member exactly what I had needed loaded into the U-HAUL truck at the time. And if I had been more explicit and had stayed longer that night, I'd still have all that stuff. I consider myself fortunate I didn't lose a couple of my favorite systems... but that was a lot of stuff, a big collection that I built up over a number of years. What can you do? You take it like an adult, you move on, and you just deal with it.

It's not like seeing this thread ruined VCF for me or anything like that, but it didn't make me any happier.

 

[cjs]

I agree Jason's post seems to be a deliberate attempt to disrupt VCF east - the tone of the post is hostile, and the timing was clearly intentional.

So when should he have posted it, and what should he have said to people who asked why he was not attending VCF East?

It looks to me as if the timing was about as generous as he could be with it. By waiting for the start of VCF East he a) ensured that people wouldn't back out of the meet based on his comments, and b) most people involved with the meet would not immediately be dragged into an on-line brouhaha because they would be busy with the meet. (With luck, many people at the meet will never even hear about it until after the meet.)

Also, I've seen comments in a couple places regarding IEEE's strict enforcement of their copyrights. I'm not as familiar with how IEEE handles that, but if it's true then many of those materials were probably not able to be archived and uploaded in the first place, and so complaining that they were lost given away is irrelevant.

I fail to to follow the reasoning behind, "We can't scan and upload the collection, so we should throw it away." If the only way for someone to read those journals is to read a paper copy, the only thing you can achieve by throwing away paper copies is denying even more people the ability to read the journals.

 

[werdna]

So when should he have posted it, and what should he have said to people who asked why he was not attending VCF East?

How about after it's over?

I fail to to follow the reasoning behind, "We can't scan and upload the collection, so we should throw it away."

Not saying that was necessarily the logic behind their actions; just that they may not have had the right to make or share copies of that information.

 

[vwestlife]

Yes, it seems clear that there's no possibility of trademarking "VCF" now that a half dozen different organisations have been using it for years.

"Vintage Computer Federation" is a registered trademark, but not VCF:

Trademark Status & Document Retrieval

 

[alank2]

I agree above about - it is all about the terms. When one person is unloading something to another, the first person is somewhat washing their hands of it, but ultimately, the terms of the arrangement are what matter. The receiver either abides by the terms or they don't. If the receiver changes because one volunteer goes out and another comes in then that certainly muddies things further.

 

[Unknown_K]

Lets be honest how many people write up legal documents signed by both parties and notarized every time they donate something? Do you have the funds and time to go to court if the second party doesn't do exactly what was written?

Most people just want a receipt for tax purposes and call it a day.

 

[amichlin]

That's a lie and you know it.

I had NO intention of getting involved in this discussion, until you lied and insulted me with your historical revisionism.

It was donated when I was in charge and we had a pretty reliable policy at that point to take only what we really needed or what was too good to pass up. You can disagree with my decision to take that particular donation, but the truth is, most offerings were politely declined.

You were too busy as the new guy / outsider, trying to tell me how to do my job. It sounds like you still prefer running your know-it-all mouth, than listening.

So YOU are the one who needs to shut up and hear the facts from the people who were actually making decisions back then.

-Evan

OK, I admit it. On this, Evan is right. I am wrong. I should have said the policy at the time was to take more than could be handled, in my opinion. I was incorrect in saying the policy was to take everything. I add the caveat of in my opinion so we can move on and not debate particular this matter any further, but Evan can have the last word.

Being wrong, however, is not lying. Jason was wrong about the disposition of the material because the current leadership of VCF Mid Atlantic/National wasn't there when it happened and neither was Evan. I never accused Jason of lying because I understand people often take action on information that might not be fully vetted and even sometimes just make mistakes or misremember. Unlike Jason (at least in this episode), I can stand being corrected with different information and always try to listen to all parties involved. Beyond that, I'll just ignore personal attacks.

Oh, and a happy ending, at least for me. I was wrong when I said I am no longer attending VCFestival events and went to VCF East over this last weekend after all this to do. I had a blast! I guess "no longer attending VCF events" was also a "lie" on my part. Guilty as charged!