[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposals for the new GNU/FSF relationship
Re: Proposals for the new GNU/FSF relationship
Sat, 4 Jan 2020 19:41:47 +0100
* Mark Wielaard <address@hidden> [2020-01-03 13:59]:
> Hi Jean,
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 06:00:00PM +0100, Jean Louis wrote:
> > So when you say "as volunteers we are happy" -- which volunteers did
> > you ask to represent their views here? Did they give you consent for
> > such? What are their names exactly? Is that anywhere recorded?
> > > To that end we have held discussions with other GNU maintainers,
> > Who is "we" in particular? Are you generalizing or speaking of
> > specific person?
> As you can see the proposal is signed by specific people who wrote up
> the summary of our discussions here.
I do not see who are those specific people, yet it does not matter.
"Social contract" is not decision of GNU project and not decision of
RMS. That is a fact.
I do not believe you ever made a direct proposal to RMS, so those
incentives to coerce community into type of a "social contract" have
not been adopted, and when any kind of proposal have been rejected,
then you should be respectful and stop with raising issues or
"dangers" which do not exist. Spreading fears, uncertainties and
doubts is not for best of anybody.
> In general we believe the conversations about new GNU govenance and
> the new relationship of the FSF and the GNU project should be held
> in public and not on private lists where a secret cabal makes
The noun cabal has 2 senses (no senses from tagged texts)
1. cabal, faction, junto, camarilla -- (a clique (often secret) that seeks
power usually through intrigue)
2. conspiracy, cabal -- (a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act
(especially a political plot))
If we would speak of any conspiracy here, then it is you who is in
that, starting with Guix leader Ludovic Courtès and others who he
called to sign the public shaming of RMS. I have asked some of those
signers and they did not even know what was that about, they simply
joined without thinking.
Your statements and incentives to take over GNU project is futile.
Guix project is anyway respected as free software, as GNU project,
neither FSF, do not mind much about their opinions, for as long as
they are doing the work to spread and disseminate free software.
GNU Project is not political.
Now, in relation to "secret cabal" -- you and me, and anybody else,
who is talking here, is talking in the halls of GNU project. We are on
the "land" of GNU project, we have been invited and welcomed here, but
the land is not ours. What the land owner speaks in his own house is
not a secret cabal, but his own GNU project.
RMS is founder of GNU project, so don't be respectful and twist it to
Respect RMS and his decisions and he certainly has all the rights to
speak in privacy with anybody he wish and want.
Thus what FSF and GNU discuss between themselves, is their own right
to communication and just right to communicate as they wish.
Your disrespect to privacy is outrageous.
> This way it is clear who suggested what and why.
It need not be clear to public who made decision of what is going on
in somebody's house.
You are in the lounge, you may enjoy the juice, and chat with other
people, but who is paying for the lounge cleaning, or organizing the
party need not be of your concern.
> If you have been following the discussions on gnu-misc-discuss you
> can see all these topics being discussed. We sadly don't have a
> specific public space just for GNU volunteers yet, so there is some
> noise from non-GNU people on this list.
I don't think it is good to divide people by saying non-GNU people on
this list or GNU volunteers. The noise on this list is coming from
protesters with specific political agenda that you are introducing
into the GNU project. GNU project is apolitical and does not accept
any political movements. Please keep it out or form your own
groups. Stop attacking GNU and dividing people by spreading fears,
uncertainties and doubs.
> But in general the people who are making these suggestions are the
> actual GNU maintainers and developers who are making GNU a reality.
There is basic principle of ownership which you don't respect. You
cannot take GNU project over by writing any kinds of social contracts
especially if those have not been accepted or have been
And please do not generalize, that small group of GNU maintainers have
joined in public shamings, does not mean all of them are there. And
their opinions are respected as such, however, those opinions do not
contribute to spread free software, and are also not part of
discussion in GNU project which welcomes everybody regardless of what
they may think. As long as those GNU maintainers are contributing to
GNU project, they are welcome, and also welcome without
contributions. What they think politically about any person in GNU
project, it does not matter, and should not be discussed on GNU
mailing lists, as we are welcoming everybody, and not bashing people
for personal opinions.
You do not need to join my thoughts on that, you can still continue
bashing RMS and trying to take it over, I just see some lack of reason
there, and big chunk of disrespect.