VeritasSapere---it's obvious to anyone reading that you have ignored nearly everything i wrote and simply continued to repeat your opinions as if they are valid responses. merely writing a response is not sufficient to prevail in a debate. you show no respect for the practice of debate and you thrive off of fallacies (which i have pointed out several times) and arguments from repetition instead of addressing the points directed at you. i've continually pointed out these dishonest tactics, yet you continue to use them. there are plenty of examples, but here is one:
what makes an open source project decentralized is a lack of centralized control. again, as gavin and hearn showed us, no one has centralized control. that is true now, it is true with a billion code forks. get over it. this is a non-issue. as i said earlier, an open source project is decentralized by definition---prove me wrong.
That decentralization and centralization exists on a spectrum already proves you wrong. It is not either decentralized or not, that is a oversimplification of the situation.
whether they exist "on a spectrum" doesn't address the argument that an open source project is on one extreme of that spectrum. stating that there is a difference between "centralized" and "decentralized" is not an argument, let alone does it prove me wrong.
more importantly, my argument was that an open source project is decentralized. since you disagree,
addressing my point involves proving yours, as you are continually suggesting that development in regards to Core can characterized by concentration of power. since no developer has any power, authority or control to force any economic participant to do anything, i'd ask that you prove that claim in accordance with common usage. merely stating that some people have a more respected opinion than others is not proof that they have power, authority or control to force any economic participant to do anything.
as indicated here, your arguments are just deflections and statements of your opinion. this is true of virtually every response you have made here, so i can't possibly justify taking the time to explain each similar instance of illogical argument. since my first post in this thread, you've made no effort to respond to my arguments, so i'm not sure why i should continue responding to yours. again---quoting what i wrote and writing something in response =/= addressing the points that i made.
it's quickly becoming clear that you are not interested in a reasoned, logical discussion, but rather to establish the appearance that your (and XT's) position is legitimate.
Some people want to win instead of admitting to be wrong.. These are the people who need to remove from power in order to get to the next step in human evolution