[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Cause for bans
Alexandre François Garreau
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Cause for bans
Fri, 14 Feb 2020 20:34:00 +0100
Le jeudi 6 février 2020, 10:51:24 CET Ludovic Courtès a écrit :
> John Darrington <firstname.lastname@example.org> skribis:
> The draft of the Social Contract at
> <https://wiki.gnu.tools/gnu:social-contract> does not mention how people
> should be “expelled” if they “disagree”. On the contrary: it’s about
> building a shared understanding of what some (hopefully most!) of us
> commit to as members of the Project.
a “contract” is something you sign, agree upon, or accept. To be useful,
either you’re gonna make it mandatory (for anything), like becoming a
maintainer (so then it would be actually maybe “less worse” (in some
sense) but inconsistant: old maintainers there before it was “accepted”
(it won’t) could stay, and new one couldn’t join), either to discriminate
people in any way according their views.
Discriminating, is, imho, something that can be productive and useful.
But in a political or so organization (like FSF for instance: it could be
meaningful to ask FSF members, when they join, to assess they’re in favor
of free-software movement’s ideals). Not in a technical project like GNU.
In the humanist (and you don’t need to be) sense, anyone should be able to
contribute because it is mere work of the mind, worked upon
> > I think that banning such people would make us guilty of the same
> > crimes that they have committed.
> Please do not misrepresent this initiative. It’s about making GNU
> stronger; you may disagree with the approach, but that doesn’t make it a
> “crime” in any sense of the word.
“crime” is a legal and hard word, its broader, common and metaphorical
sense is better encompassed by “bad” (the substantive, like in “their
bads”) or anything alike (but it doesn’t sound like really high language).
However, calling for people to be expelled (as it has been for rms) is
encompassed by what he says “seeking to expell people” as one document of
yours did, as well by one or several likely goal for a such “contract”.
Then the “crime” wouldn’t be the act, but the promotion of that act
(though that last act could also be considered as such)… you can interpret
that in two ways: either expelling is the crime we ought not to reproduce,
but nobody was (yet) expelled, so we just mean we won’t promote crimes we
accuse you of calling for. Either the crime is directly to call for such
expulsion. And then the crime has already been committed by both the
authors and the people criticizing them, then it would be more like
“you’re doing the same crime, we won’t do as well [please apologize]”.
> I would like us to move forward: what do you think GNU will lose or gain
> as a project if its members endorse a document stating its core values?
Because currently they’re “volunteers” first and foremost, and “members”
only as a state of fact resulting of it. Several of them already
publictly claimed they weren’t free-software supported, and even used and
enjoyed proprietary software.
So two possibilites: first, they don’t sign it, so what you say either
don’t realize (its members didn’t sign it), either they’re not members
anymore (and we’ve lost volunteers) ; second, they do, so they lie, your
document becomes a lie, and a tool of deception or at least of dishonesty,
like it is already common in pretty much all political organizations (and
GNU, thankfully, is not one). I think this is a fair amount of why some
people aggressively reacts to it :/ they feel the potential of dishonesty
that could come from a such thing.
> What would you add or remove to the values currently listed in the
Either remove everything, either add everything, and make that an FSF
thing, not a GNU one.
> What other initiatives would you propose to improve cohesion?
Stop requiring stuff from maintainers. Maybe, if you’re so eager to do
democracy, inclusion, feedback, etc. you should just join a GLUG or a FFDN
ISP (if you don’t already), and go vote and do politics there and within
FSF, propose votes, make polls, possibly about technical stuff, and get
back to GNU, at least for information. That’d be more relevant.