I agree 100%!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi, everyone! :)

On Sunday, August 10, 2003 03:35, Intel Nop wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> This is in regards to the declaration of intent. I believe that everybody
> should have a declaration of intent... for themselves. However, I do not
> believe that there can be any one statement with the ability to represent
> everybody. Each individual becomes involved with InvisibleNet projects for
> their own diverse intent and purposes. A general declaration of intent
> would force everyone to fall under one umbrella of ideas, thus hindering
> the creativity and originality for which it is meant to represent. This
> said, the work must speak for itself.
>
> Contributions and feedback are always appreciated as they are essential to
> the success of InvisibleNet as a whole.
>
> Thanks.
>
> 0x90

	I couldn't agree more! While I appreciate the work jrand0m has done, I just 
can't live with the Declaration of Intent he wrote. It has too many absolute 
statements that fly in the face of what I believe. So I think not having a 
single Declaration of Intent is a really good idea. Of course as nop said, we 
can each write our own so that people know why we wrote the software. :) 
Maybe we can give each developer a page for the reasons they wrote code for 
I2P when we set up the I2P website. For now, I think the I2P source code can 
stand well enough on its own without a Declaration of Intent.

	-- Hezekiah

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/NfmleHiZTMH32ioRAkV9AJ4gp1G1HpX0CIZL3u69rHy/Dq5L4wCeMPIC
TDG4fHCh5opAnc1Fgy7AMmk=
=jAHa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----