Re: Links to javascript-based websites from orgmode.org: Paypal and Github

[Michael Powe]

On 6/27/2022 19:42, Tim Cross wrote:
> Tom Gillespie <tgbugs@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > > GNU packages should not steer people towards running nonfree software.
> > > As a consequence, they should not suggest people donate using payment services
> > > that _require_ the donor to run a nonfree program.
> > A slight variant of Ihor's question.
> >
> > While GNU packages should not steer people toward nonfree software,
> > I assume that there is nothing that prohibits GNU contributors from
> > accepting donations via non-free systems.
> >
> > This thread suggests that it is no other option if devs also do not want
> > to steer people toward cryptocurrencies (which some consider to be as
> > ethically important as not steering people toward nonfree software).
> >
> > My question is whether the website for a GNU package can include links
> > to the websites of individual developers with a note that you can provide
> > financial support to the project by supporting individuals. In the end the
> > user still winds up using nonfree JS, but is GNU living up to its principles
> > by virtue of the extra layer of indirection?
> >
> > Given that https://www.fsf.org/about/ways-to-donate/ does include paypal
> > as an option, with a disclaimer, is a disclaimer not a sufficient solution for
> > GNU packages as well?
> Given that the FSF has a link to PayPal on their donations page , I
> think we can do the same for the org project. All that is required is
> that we do like the FSF does and put a bit of text beside it stating
> "Not recommended - requires nonfree Javascript". We should also include
> a postal address where people could send in donations to provide an
> alternative for those who really don't want to use the non-free service
> (which doens't have to be paypal of course - any of them would likely be
> as good).

You don't chop down a tree by snipping off the branches at the top.

Anyone completely serious about a refusal to use nonfree tools for 
making donations will send a check in the mail, literally. I raised the 
point about FSF using PayPal months ago, when this thread started. The 
response was thunderous silence. I don't like PP as a company. Its 
profits finance the activities of some truly repugnant people. The JS 
connection widget is about the most innocuous bit of that company. I 
only use PP when a CC won't work - mostly, buying overseas, which 
purchases my bank blocks without exception. No business from which I 
purchase regularly uses any other payment service. That's the reality of 
the commercialization of the internet. It blows chunks, but here we are.

I don't want to hear about ethical purity from people using products 
made by Apple, one of the most corrupt and corrupting companies on the 
planet; or, from those who shop at Amazon - ditto. I've never purchased 
a book from Amazon, but three times I've purchased products through its 
"marketplace," and I used to subscribe to its Prime video service. I 
don't buy products made in China (e.g., clothes, ceramics). But, it's 
impossible to write this message without using products made there. 
These kinds of casual lapses of ethical behavior are organic to our 
present network design.

If someone finds a payment processor that uses free software, and is 
available for users in the US, I certainly will sign up for it. That the 
FSF isn't using one suggests such services are thin on the ground, or 
nonexistent.

Thanks.

mp

--
"Do not neglect to do good, and to share what you have." - Hebrews 13:16a
Michael Powe
Naugatuck CT USA
powem@ctpowe.net