@LundukeJournal @FFmpeg Never thought I'd get tone policed by Lunduke of all people. Kind of wild that you didn't mention any of the reasons that the tech community is concerned about how the FFmpeg X account is run. You also didn't mention that this beef has since been squashed, nor that I've

@theo @FFmpeg Oh come on, now, @theo. There’s no “tone policing” here. Just a short summary of what I consider to be interesting points of the story. Offering a substantial bounty for an Open Source project to get rid of a contributor is an interesting and noteworthy thing. Whether you

@LundukeJournal @FFmpeg "Offering a substantial bounty...to get rid of a contributor" is a hilariously dishonest way of framing this. According to email list, the poster isn't even a contributor, just a random person with delegate access.

@theo @FFmpeg Noted. You disagree with people doing public outreach (social media) being referred to as “contributors”. Do you agree with the word “bounty” being used in this case? Also, how was this issue resolved? Are you satisfied with the resolution?

@LundukeJournal @FFmpeg The team formally requested that things be toned down from all sides, which I agreed was our mutual goal. They said the tweets will stop, and I deleted mine in efforts to reduce the drama. You are actively bringing the drama back up. You're working against their wishes.

@theo @FFmpeg For clarification: Have you officially retracted the $20k bounty, or does that remain in effect? Has any representative from FFmpeg contacted you privately in relation to the bounty?

@LundukeJournal @FFmpeg If I donate the $20k right now will you shut the fuck up? Nobody has contacted me regarding the "bounty". Nobody has contacted me at all. I reached out to cc@ and a rep from VLC asked if we could tone everything down. I just want what's best for the FFmpeg project.

@theo @FFmpeg Earlier when you said “The team formally requested that things be toned down”, was that referring to the VLC team and not the FFmpeg team (as you say you have had no contact with FFmpeg)? Again, just so we’re clear (as you had not answered the question), is the monetary bounty

@LundukeJournal @FFmpeg I will DM you the receipts if you agree to not share them publicly (I do not have the permission of the other people in the email thread). The "bounty" was never a formal thing. I don't know what you want from me. This is way more complex than you're making it out to be. Here,

@theo @FFmpeg Only share things with me if you are comfortable doing so. Noted that the bounty has been withdrawn. If there’s anything else you’d like to have included in my coverage of this, feel free to reach out (publicly or privately).

@LundukeJournal @FFmpeg So to be clear, I can not share things with you to give context and expect them to not be published publicly?

@theo @FFmpeg While I always confirm with sources before publishing (and never reveal the identity of whistleblowers), it is a good practice to only share information, with a journalist, which you are comfortable being out in the world.

@LundukeJournal @FFmpeg As a journalist, I always honor requests to keep details private. This is pretty standard practice. I often receive information I can not share. It helps a lot with forming the general structure of how I report on things.

@theo @FFmpeg Considering the public nature of our discussion here — and the limited scope of people who may have access to whatever related material you may be looking to share with me — it seems possible that concealing both your identity and the contents of that material is likely to prove

@LundukeJournal @theo @FFmpeg

@LundukeJournal @theo @FFmpeg He means just sharing it as a man-to-man thing, not as a journalist who’s going to gossip about it.