[Top][All Lists]

[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, 28 Oct 2019 21:54:00 +0530
User-agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)

* Samuel Thibault <> [2019-10-28 20:24]:
> Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 18:06:35 +0530, a ecrit:
> > Social Contract is now being discussed as something as adopted. I
> > do not see it is adopted.
> Nobody said it was adopted. Nobody even said such a thing would have
> to be called social contract. Nobody said it had to be written by
> a small group of people and be imposed on everybody. Some discussion
> happens here, but it doesn't intends to impose anything.

Sorry, but your statement sounds to me like Doublespeak. First one
thing, now other thing, I don't have any good feeling with that. Say
what you say, but you have contradictory statements. Personally, I
have nothing against you. I just speak for facts to be known and for
information to be transparent.

"Social Contract" is bad for GNU project. I have stated the facts

I really hope that "We Shall Force them to be Free." by Rousseau's
does not impact GNU project.

I could clearly see where it goes, few people proposing it, and then
discussing about the text of "social contract" before there was any
kind of "adoption".

Now I get told that "nobody mentioned" it.

In that sense, when few people already speak of the text of "Social
Contract" that appears as implying that "social contract" has been
adopted. Thus nobody need to say that. Implication is there and pretty
clear. See the list.

That such thing would need to be called "social contract" was said on
this list.

Nobody said that it has to be written by a small group people, but
that is exactly happening so, by the very definition of "social
contract", it is coerced fictional "contract" and it is written by
small group of people. It started on this list. Now you say it did not
start, nobody started talking about "social contract" on this
list. Huahahahhahahaha. How contradictory is that!

I am referencing to the take-over attempts by group of social justice
warriors, see
who are so much convinced that their cause is "just", without
verification of facts, and who now ask for "social contract".

The agenda is written on their page, it is in the IRC logs and various
rumors going on. They wish to control GNU project so that GNU project
complies to various whatever-they-wish politics that are beyond GNU
project's goals and purposes.

The proposal about "social contract" is the next step, next attempt of
take over of the GNU project.

GNU project is welcoming EVERYBODY who wish to contribute to promotion
and application of free software philosophy and whoever wish to
propose new GNU software projects.

GNU project does not discriminate by gender, or other classes, neither
verifies genders of contributors, or their classes, as everybody is
welcome to contribute and I am sure that people can even use
pseudonyms when contributing, so that their gender cannot be
recognized by their names. That is what I know. That is what is stated
on FSF and web pages.

No need for "social contract" in GNU project.

I have guts feeling on why there is proposal for "social contract"
here, as it is clear by the propaganda that is going on the Guix pages
by the very Guix leader Ludovic Courtès jointly with few others of the
Thoughtpolice Squad.

The way to go by your group of defamers is to start with the "social
contract" and then to continue publicly defaming Stallman or whoever
that group of Social Justice Warriors wish to defame and slander.

"Social Contract" would be such a nice tool to impose what other
people shall think and what political views shall their express
privately, or otherwise they would be forbidden.

You would have tool for better Thoughtpolicing.

I am sorry, that is what I feel.

I feel that only reason why is "social contract" mentioned is to make
rules to justify their defamation and slander of Dr. Richard Stallman
and continue doing so.

That is my feeling. It kind of speaks clearly to me... my guts, you

But what is going on here with the group of people that are trying to
take over control of GNU project, for reasons of radical
feminism. That is what Ludovic Courtès told me on IRC when I asked him
to give me some facts.

You Samuel Thibault you have signed and stated that defamation and
slander of Dr. Richard Stallman on:

How about you explain Samuel, to me, I am curious, why did you make a
statement on "GNU Project" when statement is about Dr. Richard

Or you will say "nobody said that"? Sure you can say that, but it does
not make you trusted, you have no argument.

Tell me simply the fact that PROVES that "Stallman’s behavior over the
years has undermined a core value of the GNU project: the empowerment
of all computer users. GNU is not fulfilling its mission when the
behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to
reach out to."?

Do you have ONE FACT?

You are defaming founder of GNU project. Could you please give some
facts, give some weight to that?

Is it abort() joke? Emacs Virgin joke? MIT episode? What is it? His
thoughts? Opinions?

I can say, there is one fact: RMS did not do anything illegal.

I can also say that defamation and slander is illegal in France. That
is also fact.

And I can say that there is one big bunch of tolerance in GNU project
community towards you and others. A privilege that you do not

Would there be a "social contract" now, you would be expelled right
away. Don't you realize it?

Let us hope that no such thing as "social contract" in the future of
GNU does not come to its existence.

> > It is wrong in its definition, from its definition of the term
> > social contract.
> > 
> > The term takes its name from The Social Contract
> I don't think it does, I have never seen any reference to that in
> anything talking about the Debian Social Contract, and not in the
> 1997 discussions leading to it either. Actually it took me a bit of
> time to even just realize what reference you were talking about
> (even if I am French and know about Rousseau's work). If we had to
> abandon anything that has the same title as something else in the
> world, we would run out of words. 

You can think what you wish. You can see clouds and think
apples. Nobody forbids you thinking whatever you wish.

GNU Project is not run by same principles as Debian GNU/Linux. There
is absolutely nothing to be compared to.

Words ARE important. That is how you submit message to other party.

If you use the term "social contract" then it has its etymology and
background and history. That cannot be ignored. Nobody needs to
reference it in the Debian, there are books, encyclopedias, there is
Rousseau, thus using the term implies you are using the term with its
history and etymology in its meanings. It becomes derived from its
previous meanings.

You can say it is not, when it is, you can confuse others or be
confused, but you cannot change facts of the etymology for the term
"social contract".

In general any introduction of "social contract" into GNU project is
introduction of "political philosophy" that is, IMHO, "other politics"
that shall not and need not be part of GNU project.

It is successful, evidently, without any kind of "social contract".

Your attempts to take-over are futile. Ludovic Courtès's and Samuel
Thibault's defamatory statement on to
take over the GNU project are futile. So far it is so.

But, please, you keep trying for entertainment purposes and more
transparency. I love you people. For as long as there is GNU project
and free software there will be jokes and entertainment. 

I would prefer an attorney rather from some country which values
freedom and free speach more than France as France is not in the first
top five in the world. But French attorney or legal advisor could give
you better explanation of what "social contract" means.

> Anyway, once more nobody said such a thing had to be called that
> way, it was just a way to refer to something that has been used in
> another project, and not meaning it would have to be implemented the
> same in the GNU project.

Thank you. Well said, it is "other" project. GNU came first. Not
Debian. Debian does not define the GNU project. It is more other way

I understand how you think that "nobody said such a thing had to be
called that way" where you are referencing the term "social contract",
but that term I have found in this mailing list. Who exactly said is
not of my concern, everybody shall speak what they wish, but that it
was said cannot be disputed, as there is archive for this list.

Let me state again my opinion of GNU project and welcoming ANY FEMALE
OR MALE, as that is exactly the problem here, the problem that nobody
is speaking of except one time when Ludovic Courtès mentioned it to me
on IRC Guix chat.

Problem is that few people here, like you and Ludovic and others think
that GNU project is not welcoming females. Right? abort() joke is a
joke, it has nothing really with welcoming or not welcoming. Emacs
Virgin joke is a joke, and it is successful joke that is presented to
multiple audiences throughout the world. I could see all people
laughing. See here: and observe
people laughing. Are we now to expect religious zealots to come over
to GNU and say how "Richard Stallman" is making fun out of their
Jesus, or put here any other deity, and for that reason he shall step
down? Can you hear people giggling?

You want to take down Richard for reason that we have "Church of
Emacs"? Hahahhhahaa. That he said we have saints? Or that he mentioned
Emacs Virgins?

Come on people, calm down, if you don't like the joke, don't laugh,
but don't say it is not a joke. People laugh.

Don't bash Richard for jokes, it is appears stupid and immature.

Please don't introduce "social contract" for reason that one
defamation page written by Ludovic Courtès and other members of the
Thoughtpolice Squad have been inflated by media that we need "social
contract". We don't. The page is defamation, fact-less statement, not
well written anyway, it hurts Ludovic, it hurts Guix, it hurts
GNU. It is piece of crap.

You wish to promote feminist agenda? You are welcome. But setup your
website somewhere else. Not on Guix, not on GNU, not on GNU project.

Stallman did it on -- and I remember back in time his
opinions were on GNU.ORG, I remember well, because I was myself
confused why is some other subject but free software published on
GNU.ORG, over the time, all personal opinions were transferred to and it must be done so as FSF is the non-profit
organization and he cannot speak on FSF websites and favor any
politician, or tax-free status could be in danger. That is US
law. That is why he keeps his opinions on

I really welcome everybody to invite women or whoever gender one
identifies with, into the GNU project, but GNU project is not there
for gender diversity, it is there to make a free operating system.

On August 18th 2019, I have asked professor Tanenbaum, maker of Minix
operating system, which inspired Linus Torvalds to make the "Linux"
kernel, why there is less interest at female population to computer
science. Please ask him yourself, verify the facts. He said that they
tried hard to attract females, but it hasn't worked so far. He
explained to me that at the age of 3 girls are told they can be
mommies and nurses and teachers. Computer programmer is not in the

Thus, there are many various reasons for lack of gender diversity, but
GNU project is not about gender diversity, fight for your causes, but
find appropriate group somewhere else, as GNU is about free operating

GNU project is welcoming EVERYBODY who wish to contribute to promotion
and application of free software philosophy and whoever wish to
propose new GNU software projects. I have not get other feeling in
last 20 years of using GNU software and observing GNU contributors. I
have not participated much, but I have got feeling of very welcoming
and friendly community.

I can see that nonsense is written about GNU project, such as this
one: by Camille Akmut, October 4th,
2019. I cannot see any "facts". That she is making lists of people who
are female or male based on their names is sad situation for me. I
feel sorry for that person as she finds it "stressful" and "being
offended" that there are more males then females in GNU project.

But GNU project does not look into person's gender when person is
applying or proposing a GNU project.

However, everybody is free to open up GNU Computer Club where one can
promote or impose that equal number of females and males shall be in
such club. I would not do that, I would simply be welcoming.

Camille Akmut writes: "GNU is not for women – such would be the
conclusion of anyone going through our statistics." -- but that is not
a policy, not a fact, not discrimination, that is the feeling of
Camille Akmut, she feels "offended" because she was verifying who is
male and who is female?!

Sure people can do all kind of analysis as they wish, but that is not
useful, does not contribute to society, and it is not free software
philosophy. Accusing "GNU project" for jokes is ridiculous. Accusing
GNU project for reasons of who has penis and who not, and how less
penises would be better for free software is funny. I don't know how
it influences the software, it just looks funny to me.

And again: GNU project is for everybody, there is absolutely no policy
on discrimination against everybody. And what somebody does in their
private lives does not matter to GNU project.

Those other politics and movements are dividing GNU project, but they
are not contributing to it by spreading free software

Please don't act by rumors. Value friendship and what we have in
common. Remove that defamation, it is not worth yourself, not worth
for your life. What are you getting from it? Just accusing Stallman
and being "proud"? I have no idea what benefit you or anybody else is
getting by that defamation.

Jean Louis

reply via email to

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