[libreplanet-discuss] censorship or technical issues in FSF lists?

[Daniel Pocock]

Hi all,

I received the reply below personally

It includes CC: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org but the message
didn't appear through the list

Is this because of list settings (requires the list address in the To
header) or because of some moderation policies or because some people
are censored?  Can FSF tell us if any people are currently censored on
this list and if so, how many?

Some people contacted me given the way I have raised concerns about
censorship in other communities recently.  A rushed change of the
president appears to be a vulnerable time for any organization.

After FSFE started censoring communications from elected community
representatives (myself), the discussion was migrated to a parallel
list.  If anybody wants to know they are receiving every message at this
crucial time, please come and join us there, it can be your canary in
the coal mine.

https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Personal invitations to subscribe have already been sent to many people
I correspond with.  It is hosted in Switzerland so any censors promise
to be neutral.  Nonetheless, I would draw your attention to the bigger
question: Any list admin eventually becomes tempted to censor things,
which free software technology provides the best way to eliminate the
risk of censorship?

https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/pipermail/discussion/2019-May/000000.html

Regards,

Daniel


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] membership confusion, FSF way forward
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:19:50 +0530
From: Nishant Sharma <nishant@unmukti.in>
To: Leah Rowe <info@minifree.org>, Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
<libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>, Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.pro>
CC: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org



On 23 September 2019 8:48:42 AM IST, Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
<libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> wrote:
>
>I take issue with this: there is the issue of vetting regular members.
>What if a bunch of members are present who do not share the FSF's
>hardline stance on free software?
>

I agree. The governance and other decisions should remain with the core
members who believe and support the hardline stance.

In comparison to democratic governance of a nation, a government doesn't
ask for views / vote from every citizen on every matter. We trust our
representatives to speak for us and take decisions in the best interest
of the nation.

Let's have faith in the board members of the FSF and at the same time
keep a check on them. It is our responsibility to keep writing/talking
to them to not let them deviate from the principles and ethics it was
founded on and for.

Regards,
Nishant
-- 
https://unmukti.in - Embedding FOSS
https://hopbox.in - Networking with Free Software & Open Hardware
http://charcoal.io - URL redirector for distributed squid proxies