[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GNU - Principles and Guidelines (was: Re: A GNU “social contract”?)

From: Mark Wielaard
Subject: Re: GNU - Principles and Guidelines (was: Re: A GNU “social contract”?)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 01:01:20 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)

Hi Alfred,

On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 02:42:06PM -0500, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> One cannot assume good faith from those who are clearly hostile to the
> GNU project.

I am certainly not hostile to the GNU project. I love the GNU project
and most people working on it. It is almost like a second family to
me. I don't want to harm my family. I believe in the FSF mission for
Free Software for everybody and try to do my best to get there through
my work on GNU.

> You've shown over and over again, even in your last
> email claiming that the FSF somehow appointed Brandon as a co-chief of
> the GNU project, that you have no intention to listen to those who are
> part of the leadership structure (like Brandon) who know what they are
> talking about.

That is not exactly what I said. But maybe I explained things in a
confusing way. I certainly listen to Brandon and find his experiences
very helpful.

> If you were interested, and in good faith, you would have raised the
> topic on the internal lists, as was requested, but you have not.  And
> as far as I can see, there is still no reply to the question if
> you/Ludo/...  are willing to let the GNU project take the text that
> you've drafted as some sort of starting point?

I believe we did raise the issue a couple of times on the internal
lists and said we felt it would be better to have the discussion in
the open going forward. Which is what we are doing right now.

>    > Patently false, it is RMS who ratifies changes that are applicable to
>    > the GNU project and nobody else.  Please stop spreading these made up
>    > notions of how the GNU project is governed.
>    We are discussing how we want the GNU project to be governed. This is
>    simply my opinion how we can collectively come together describing
>    it. I do acknowledge that you feel differently about that.
> No, you are discussing how _you_ want the GNU project governed, this
> we is fictional -- there is no we here.  There is no collective
> agreement, since there is no "we".

We are not having a discussion? It seems we really are. I gave my
opinion on how I see GNU governance going forward and what my
experiences and impressions of it from the past were. And you are
sharing your opinion.

> The GNU project is maintained by RMS.

I do wish you explained your opinions a bit more though.



reply via email to

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