●● IRC: #techbytes @ Techrights IRC Network: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 ●● ● Jun 28 [04:01] *liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) [04:01] *rianne_ has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) [04:03] *rianne has quit (Ping timeout: 120 seconds) [04:04] *rianne_ (~rianne@3stvfjh5iuw88.irc) has joined #techbytes [04:04] *rianne (~rianne@freenode-7uc.ra8.a7lnth.IP) has joined #techbytes [04:05] *liberty_box (~liberty@3stvfjh5iuw88.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Jun 28 [05:25] schestowitz[TR] > Hi, [05:25] schestowitz[TR] > [05:25] schestowitz[TR] > Please let me know when this is published! [05:25] schestowitz[TR] > [05:25] schestowitz[TR] > Thanks, [05:25] schestowitz[TR] Just opened E-mail for the first time in 2 days, sorry for the delay. ● Jun 28 [06:03] schestowitz[TR] > Hi! [06:03] schestowitz[TR] > [06:03] schestowitz[TR] > Here it is, attached. My most wide-ranging piece yet. I put a lot of effort into this - I hope a few people read it. [06:03] schestowitz[TR] http://techrights.org/2023/06/28/making-community/ | Gemini address: gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2023/06/28/making-community/ [06:03] schestowitz[TR] only edit made: " World Library, 2013" [06:03] schestowitz[TR] Added full stop. [06:03] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | Making Community | Techrights [06:27] schestowitz[TR] http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/06/keeping-digital-poker-face-assessing.html?showComment=1687708878721#c2768982617537077959 [06:27] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Keeping a digital poker face: Assessing witness credibility in the ViCo age (T 423/22) - The IPKat [06:27] schestowitz[TR] Dear Max Drei,

The only thing which is sacred for the EPO and the boards is what enables them to look even more efficient as they have looked up to now. Whether this ties up with the interests, requirements or wishes of the users is at best of no importance whatsoever.

The EPO should actually propose to delete Art 113(1). This rule is a nuisance on the way to absolute efficiency. I take bets that the AC would [06:27] schestowitz[TR] agree with such a proposal should it come from the upper spheres of the EPO.

Joke beside, a former VP1 has uttered this proposal a few years ago. Examining is just a play on words and it could be made much more efficient without this requirement.

Early certainty can only be achieved when the procedures are as efficient as possible.

Just look at the last amendment proposed to the RPBA. One moth to [06:27] schestowitz[TR] reply to a statement of grounds of appeal! the boards would however have the discretion to extend the time limit in case of a plurality of parties.
● Jun 28 [09:50] schestowitz[TR] Dear Max Drei,

The only thing which is sacred for the EPO and the boards is what enables them to look even more efficient as they have looked up to now. Whether this ties up with the interests, requirements or wishes of the users is at best of no importance whatsoever.

The EPO should actually propose to delete Art 113(1). This rule is a nuisance on the way to absolute efficiency. I take bets that the AC would [09:50] schestowitz[TR] agree with such a proposal should it come from the upper spheres of the EPO.

Joke beside, a former VP1 has uttered this proposal a few years ago. Examining is just a play on words and it could be made much more efficient without this requirement.

Early certainty can only be achieved when the procedures are as efficient as possible.

Just look at the last amendment proposed to the RPBA. One moth to [09:50] schestowitz[TR] reply to a statement of grounds of appeal! the boards would however have the discretion to extend the time limit in case of a plurality of parties.
> OK! [09:50] schestowitz[TR] > [09:50] schestowitz[TR] > Thanks [09:50] schestowitz[TR] Very good article and TIMELY too, due to: [09:50] schestowitz[TR] http://techrights.org/2023/06/27/the-global-empire-strikes-back/ [09:50] schestowitz[TR] partly inspired by the draft you had sent [09:50] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | Free Software Communities Make Red Bait (IBM), Google, Microsoft (GAFAM) and Others Obsolete, But Theyre Fighting Back Viciously and Mercilessly | Techrights [09:53] schestowitz[TR] > Oh, I just noticed that you have dropped the "i" from Grzybowski when you posted the piece. I hope you can fix that. [09:53] schestowitz[TR] Oops. Fixed. [09:53] schestowitz[TR] Wondering how that happened, maybe mouse. [09:53] schestowitz[TR] See https://yewtu.be/watch?v=AfKZclMWS1U [09:53] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-yewtu.be | Grzegorz Brzczyszczykiewicz (HD) - Invidious [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > Hi there! [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > I'm not sure if you're still an editor with Tech Rights (If you aren't, [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > can I please be pointed in the right direction? Many thanks in advance!) [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > anyhow, if you are still an editor, is there any way for my name to be [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > removed from this signed list [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > ? I am plenty aware of where it came from, but I would still like to have it removed on your end if that's at all possible due to privacy issues. [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > [09:58] schestowitz[TR] > Thank you so much! [09:58] schestowitz[TR] The list is a public list of names of people who had themselves signed a public and open letter. They moreover had a chance to withdraw their name from it. [09:58] schestowitz[TR] Privacy is freedom from snooping, not a freedom from consequences for public actions. [09:58] schestowitz[TR] Kind regards, ● Jun 28 [10:41] *psydroid2 (~psydroid@u8ftxtfux23wk.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Jun 28 [14:02] *psydroid3 (~psydroid@u8ftxtfux23wk.irc) has joined #techbytes [14:11] *GNUmoon2 has quit (connection closed) [14:11] *GNUmoon2 (~GNUmoon@i4i4k5b832g88.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Jun 28 [16:25] *u-amarsh04 has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) [16:30] *u-amarsh04 (~amarsh04@h9w2ackdz5nh2.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Jun 28 [18:07] *parsifal (~parsifal@aahfbjmj4hann.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Jun 28 [23:52] *parsifal has quit (Quit: Leaving)