gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A GNU “social contract”?


From: Jean Louis
Subject: Re: A GNU “social contract”?
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:50:21 +0530
User-agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)

* Mark Wielaard <address@hidden> [2019-11-11 14:50]:
> Hi Brandon,
> 
> On Fri, 2019-11-08 at 16:36 +0000, Brandon Invergo wrote:
> > A social contract is only a necessity in a community-run organization
> > because it helps prevent the organization from moving off-course.  When
> > the moral compass of the organization is set and maintained by a leader
> > or group of leaders, then it is completely unnecessary.  If you believe
> > GNU should be community-run, then you'll want to see a social contract;
> 
> I think this is a good observation. It is one step that is necessary
> for making sure GNU really is a Free Software movement based on shared
> values, away from what some might see as just based on on a cult-of-
> personality.

Your statement seem not to be made to foster GNU contributions. Wasn't
your question already answered by Alfred just before 2 days:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-11/msg00355.html

"But lets please drop this subject here, there is little to pursue
unless you activley involve people who make decisions for the GNU
project, i.e. RMS."

You denigrate Dr. Richard Stallman as "cult-of-personality" and you
try to go "around" the founder of the GNU project by introducing your
politics and trying to "take over" GNU by introducing doubts and
denigrations such as "cult of personality".

Your question about "social contract" have already been explained
here:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-11/msg00360.html

> > if you think it should be run as it currently is, then it's
> > impossible to see a use for it.
> > 
> > Given that nothing has changed in how GNU is being run, it appears
> > that the cart is being placed well before the horse.
> 
> There might be different perceptions on how GNU is actually run in
> practice. Some might say it already is completely
> community-run. Some might claim there is one person who is
> ultimately responsible for all decisions. It is probably somewhere
> in between. With different people believing different things about
> their roles and responsibilities. And that is why I want to have
> more clearly written down what the structure and mission of the GNU
> project is. 

What matters are contributions to GNU project. Founder Dr. Stallman is
ultimately responsible for creation and any other important decisions,
and it is known that he never works completely alone. Read again here:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-11/msg00355.html

Believes or perception is not important for the person wishing to
contribute to GNU project, that person may ask right people and will
get clear answers.

> Because I think it is bad to have a governance structure that people
> don't agree on.

Please do not generalize when you speak for yourself. You are using
"people" like it is some kind of public or big number, while it is far
from that. Be specific in your expressions, as being specific is
friendly and would avoid introduction of fears, uncertainties and doubts.

> I thought we had agreed not to make things personal in generic
> governance discussion threads. You say shame rms and the GNU project
> as if they are one and the same thing. That might be how we see things
> differently. Personally I don't believe they are the same thing.
> also not sure who you mean with they. But if you mean me personally,
> then no, I don't want to shame rms by trying to formulate what I think
> we (as in we GNU hackers together) believe is the mission of the GNU
> project. In fact I hope he will agree that it correctly describes what
> we all believe in.  I do think rms is an important voice to hear in
> this discussion. If he doesn't agree with it, then we might have to
> reword things a bit.

It is already clear that there is not much of mutual agreement, so why
don't you speak to Dr. Stallman? More communication does not
hurt. This way you speak into air while your questions have been
already answered. Clarify your issues directly. I understand that
after all the unjustified public shamings you have got problems on
that, but hey, just pull yourself and try it.

It should be very obvious, communicated and set clear, that GNU
project is founded by Dr. Stallman. 

You have to understand that there will be no way around the
founder. Put yourself together and communicate to founder without
using proxies and this type of nuisance.

Jean



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]