[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
From: |
Daniel Pocock |
Subject: |
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed |
Date: |
Thu, 27 Feb 2020 22:26:27 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 |
On 22/02/2020 08:29, Alex Taylor wrote:
> Finally "endorsing" the text would give the rebel group a legitimacy
> which they neither have, nor deserve. It's instructive to look at the
> track record of these renegades. The Guile and Guix projects have both
> excluded and/or vilified people who disagree with the people in power
> (the same people who push the "social contract"). If you choose to
> endorse this text, bear in mind that the words are imprecise so don't be
> surprised if, sometime down the road, your endorsement is used as a
> weapon against you when you fall out of favor with the powermongers.
It took me a few days, but I finally came up with a concise summary of
the situation:
https://fsfellowship.eu/what-is-a-safe-space/
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Jean Louis, 2020/02/22
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Mike Gerwitz, 2020/02/22
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, 2020/02/22
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed, Leo Famulari, 2020/02/24
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed,
Daniel Pocock <=