On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 02:11:01PM +0200, Arthur Miller wrote:
> <tomas@tuxteam.de> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 03:41:25AM +0000, arthur miller wrote:
> >> I share your sentiment about using different mail provider. Personally I have
> >> gmail and outlook (live) accounts, but I would rather skip both if I could.
> >> Alternative to me is what my ISP offers, but that changes when I switch ISP so
> >> it is not a "stable" as gmail/outlook. I think that my current ISP does not
> >> even offer email service, but I am not sure.
> >> 
> >> I would gladly pay for a "free" email service that guarantees my privacy, so somebody should hint FSF/GNU people for possible business opportunity here :-).
> >
> > There are. Depending on your tastes, riseup.net might qualify
> > (those are even voluntary contribution).
> 
> That was an interesting offer! On paper that sounds awesome, question is
> how long-lasting they will be.

You never know. But if past is any indication... they are around since
about 2000, so that's twenty years.

>                           Second - who the heck they are? Being
> born in a communist/socialist country I am a bit suspect of their
> left-rhetorics and anonymous "collective". I do share their ideas,
> sentiments and values, but they are completely anoynomous and thus
> non-transparent, so how can I trust them?

They do have a political slant, true. But they are up-front about
it, so each one can decide.

[...]

> > Search locally: most of those offers aren't "big names" for a
> > reason.
> 
> You might be correct. I haven't really being looking around myself. But
> I would still prefer to help monetary some organisation I trust (like
> FSF/GNU).

They are focussed on free software. I don't think they are in the mail
provider "business". If you want to host a free project... Savannah might
fit the bill.

> >> Skickat från min Samsung Galaxy-smartphone.
> >
> > Hey, your phone is posting ads here! Tell him to behave ;-)

> Interesting how information is interpretted. I would rather say this was
> a pure statement from my phone rather then an ad: it didn't say - go by
> me! :-). (I was at the go, didn't have access to Emacs :-)).

't was a bit tongue-in-cheek, although from time to time it becomes a
tad tiresome to read all those "this mail was hand-made on that AWESOME
y-Phone!!!

Nevermind :) Cheers
 - t