Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Time for Actions

[Andy Halsall]

On Wednesday 26 March 2008 00:24:23 Simon Ward wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 10:19:24PM +0000, Andy Halsall wrote:
> > > As you may gather from my previous posts, I don’t think we should aim
> > > for separation from the FSF, but that may be just me.
> >
> > If the aim is that the FSUK is a UK chapter of the FSF then fine - if not
> > then I think some separation is warranted, or in the very least we should
> > not be exclusively related to the FSF.
>
> Not exclusively related.  I think purposefully distancing Manchester
> Free Software from the FSF achieves little, other than a sense of
> independence or egotistical high.

I cant quite determine the meaning of that paragraph... If what you are saying 
is that the FSUK *is* intended to be independent from the FSF and that using 
FSF resources is simply the best option then I am happy with it.  If what you 
are saying is that the FSUK is *not* intended to be independent and is indeed 
a subset of the FSF, but that we may still have a relationship with other 
groups and that restricts who or what we can do, then I am not as happy.  As 
an example, how would you feel about the FSUK working with say the BCS with 
regards to some element of software freedom or indeed a joint event of some 
sort?

What I am saying, other than I think this may have been blown somewhat out of 
proportion is that;

1. I would like to see the visible parts of FSUK come together under the 
fsuk.org domain and under whatever constitutes the fsuk organisation, how 
that can, or indeed if it should be achieved I will leave for now as I don't 
know. I should add that this isn't urgent, but if possible anything new that 
we start doing could do with being done consistently from the start so we 
don't have to migrate or move stuff later (or otherwise confuse people).

The reasoning behind that is simple;

  a. It means that generally people can associate what we are doing and from 
  an advocacy point of view it gives us some consistency.  People (from within
  or outside of the group) have a starting point from which all the other bits 
  are available.

  b. It also means that all the info we are likely to need is in one place and  
 
  I don't have to go to fsuk.org to see who the speaker is, somewhere else to
  check that someone has confirmed the speaker/venue and somewhere else again 
  to see if there is anything that needs doing - obviously the simplest way of 
  solving that is to use the wiki to inform everyone of all the relevant 
  resources, that way we don't need to trawl the mailing list to find out 
where 
  stuff is. (As I said, I am guilty of adding to the complexity by using 
  fbsa.eu, but at the time it was all I had access to that would do what I 
  needed, if I had had the option of starting out within the fsuk.org domain I 
  would have done.).

2. I would like to see the whole FSUK thing develop in a manner that is 
inclusive, I would like to see people with no idea about Software Freedom, 
the GPL, FSF, FSUK or any other aspect to be welcome and be able to find out 
what its about and how it is beneficial to and impacts on us in the UK.

>
> > > Why is separation from the FSF such a strong concern?
> >
> > Its not. The only issue I have with it, is that if the FSUK is not a UK
> > chapter of the FSF then some independence and autonomy is required.  If
> > nothing else its the look of the thing.  there has been some discussion
> > on the list so I thought I would highlight it here again for
> > consideration.
>
> I think that where we are now, we are already independent.  We are here
> now discussing who we want to affiliate with, how close, etc.  Becoming
> a chapter of the FSF is more joining it from our position.  It’s us who
> decides, not the FSF or any other organisation, isn’t that autonomy?
>
> > I guess what needs to be established fairly early on is the relationship
> > that we intend to have with the FSF (I would have thought this is a
> > matter of how close rather than anything else). Poll?
>
> I kind of like where we are.  If it ain’t broke, etc.

I don't know where we are in relation to the FSF, I guess simply clarifying 
that for me is sufficient. Like I said its not that big a deal, unless of 
course there is some influence outside of FSUK members that directs the group 
or limits its activities.

Frankly the above is really not massively useful for the group, as long as we 
can do what we have been doing I'm happy. I guess I am marginally worried 
that, what has for me been a remarkably nice experience, will cease because 
of some petty issue or fragmentation, hence my view that close relationships 
coupled with agnosticism with regard to other organisations is desirable.

Andy.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.