Re: GNU - Principles and Guidelines

[Jean Louis]

* Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org> [2020-01-07 00:06]:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 12:19:12AM -0500, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> > > Perhaps remedying this is something that could be added to the
> > > governance discussion - how the GNU leader is chosen, what powers the
> > > FSF is required to cede, and how to enforce those.
> > 
> > Discussions of how to mitigate potential legal issues related to
> > Copyright, the GNU trademark, hosting, funding, etc are certainly worth
> > discussion.  Even though I have confidence in the FSF today, maybe
> > something will change a decade from now.
> > 
> > But those issues are entirely separate from governance.
> 
> They are separate issues, but we need both. Think of GNU and FSF as
> GNU Mes with its Scheme in C and C in Scheme compilers.
> Bootstrapping both together will strenghten trust.
> 
> The FSF is really important to the GNU project. The FSF is a US
> 501(c)(3) public charity that has a fiduciary duty to make sure that
> their resources are used according to their mission for the public
> good. And they are our legal guardian to protect us against some
> personal liability (see e.g. the various patent trolls which none of
> us could take on individually).
> 
> We need each other as close partners and should make sure we have
> clear and transparent agreements how we work together.

According to your statement above, then if you are not a member of the
Board of the FSF, you have no final sayings in how would FSF conduct
its resolutions or its business.

If you have any specific resource by FSF that is not used according to
their mission, why not say so? Why are you generalizing and spreading
fears, uncertainties and doubts?

If FSF is your legal guardian, would depend of the FSF. If you do not
have FSF's resolution that confirms it to be your legal guardian, than
it is not, so please do not spread false information. Corporations
work by the law, by articles and memorandum of incorporation, by their
by-laws, by their resolutions. If there is no such resolution or other
legal document, then it is simply not so.

FSF is with GNU and GNU is with FSF, there is no doubt there. Helping
each other just as usual.

If any agreement is to be made between GNU and FSF then it is up to
RMS to make such agreement. FSF did not ask you to comment on the GNU
governance, but you can do so, obviously. FSF asked to comment on the
relation between the FSF and GNU.

Thus any topic about GNU governance is here off-topic, especially so
that RMS is not involved in this discussion and that there is
statement by RMS: "I continue to be the Chief GNUisance of the GNU
Project.  I do not intend to stop any time soon." see www.stallman.org

Thus you speak in vain, you are making evil take-over attempt, it is
not welcome, it is not proper, you are not contacting proper line
which is RMS only, if you wish to propose a new philosophical document
or legal document, then you would draft it and propose to RMS, and
then respect the decision.

What you are doing now does not show good intentions, as you are
discussing it beyond the knowledge of RMS who has finaly say in GNU
project. It is disrespectful. I do not know who is to trust you after
all this.

Jean