Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Jean Louis]

* Alexander Vdolainen <alex@vapaa.xyz> [2019-10-09 23:13]:

> I'm nobody (yep, I'm using GNU Guile, GNU Emacs and GUIX and a lot
> of other GNU projects (make, gcc, binutils etc ...), but I'm not a
> great contributor yet). However those events are going to look like
> a decision point to move on from GNU community sw.

I feel disgusted by Ludovic Courtès not for reasons of him having an
opinion, but for reason that he is using GNU platform to bring hatred
into GNU community. Would he be using facts, I would not be that much
upsate. Would he answer on my questions to provide me facts, I would
not be that upset.

He did answered to me, he said the fact is that RMS used abort() joke.

So one joke for which he has no sense of humor is just enough to say
how RMS has undermined core values of GNU project "over years".

Ludovic Courtès is hypocrat that is using GNU platform to destroy both
Guix and GNU project. He is probably unaware of that, as good behavior
is something one gets from parents. He does not know what is he
doing. That is why the FSF need to have policy makers and policy
enforcers to remove such hatred from GNU Project website (Guix).

> > to oppose free software, and there are numerous facts of his good
> > deeds for free software, for haven's sake he is the founder of the
> > GNU Project and the Free Software Foundation, such wishy-washy
> > statements have no place on GNU.ORG domain.

> Agreed. And again it all looks like a personal war.

I would be immature to accuse RMS, but anybody, without verifying the
facts and without trying to speak to that person first. Isn't that
most humane and friendly?

Most of all, I would not accuse anybody of thoughtcrime, for their
free speech and opinions. If somebody has bad sense of humor, I will
simply not laugh. Not so for Ludovic Courtès, he finds simple joke
good reason enough to bash on RMS who provided him webspace, domain,
platform, and community, and whole organization and funding through
the FSF. Unbelievable.

And he has not a slightest sense of integrity to recognize what harm
is he doing to RMS and GNU and Guix and the FSF and the community.

There are if not thousands of comments on Ludovic Courtès disgraceful
statement on Internet, but none of them have been re-published or
allowed on Guix pages. They are just biased. They openly said in the
Guix IRC log that they will not allow any comments on their
statements.

What RMS shall do, in my opinion, and I am not RMS, he shall enforce
policies and remove such from Guix projects, or let the Guix project
be hosted elsewhere outside of GNU.ORG domain and website. But he is I
guess waaaay to kind for something like that to happen, and from FSF I
never found public information that they are enforcing some good
behavior guideliness.

That is harassment, can harassment of RMS stop?

Can generalizations stop?

Can those rumors stop? Why they need to be spread on GNU.ORG website?

 > Thus I am proposing to FSF, and any reader of this message to kindly
> > ask those people to either provide facts, or to retract their
> > statements from Guix and GNU pages.
> How can I help with that ?

Write to those people who signed the disgraceful statement and tell
them your opinion. Ask them for facts. Ask them is one or few jokes
and opinions of RMS really worth to defame, slander and ruin his well
being and position in the community?

In fact, would I be RMS, I would replace those projects, fork them,
and let those rumor mongers go out of the GNU project.

GNU.ORG domain belongs to RMS, directly or indirectly.

Imagine my father gives my bed, room, food, education and money for
living, and then I go spiting in the face of my father.

I am saying no to that behavior.

But even if it would not be my father, I have respect to people who
are first older then me, and I wait with my judgments, and second, I
have great respect of people who have done social betterment actions,
like RMS did for this planet.

> > Those undersigners on the defamatory statement as published by
> > Ludovic Courtès are not representing the community neither they
> > have such authorizations. Statement is written by some amateur,
> > that is not public relation, that is hatred. That is harassment
> > and defamation.
> > 
> > Additionally it is criminal act in France.
> It's time to use a court ...

As I said, knowing RMS, he is waay too kind, he would probably never
do something like that. But I wonder how Ludovic Courtès allows
himself to commit criminal acts in France. Even I would never charge
him, for reasong that I would not like to vomit when I see him face to
face.

> I suppose people acts like the pointed 'undersigners' should go away
> and enjoy political shit they are proposing somewhere in twitter or

Exactly, they shall resign from GNU project.

That is hostile takeover attempt.

GNU.ORG belongs to RMS, I just wish he would be using more of his
authority and take over GNU project to RMS back and assign it only to
trusted people.

Those signers are not trusted people. They are all currently abusing
the GNU project, doing exactly that what they have accused RMS of.

> ...  loony girl from salesforce will provide such place, I don't
> know. The point is - it's all *not* about GNU, and gnu.org isn't a
> place for a dummy war of social justice monkeys warriors.  GNU is a
> mostly technical organization built for those who are ready to
> contribute (or use at least) to the free software, and that space
> doesn't have enough room for hysterical monkeys following modern
> leftist movement. Personally, I think that all this political shit
> over RMS is a way to split a community and to get more points for
> this stupid movement.

Let me use some of set theory:

- there is larger and broader community of free software supporters,
  users, which includes the political movements of open source and BSD
  and everything together

- there is smaller community of GNU free software supports who
  understand differences between open source and free software, and
  they are all pretty much friendly to each other. They may like GNU
  project or think being theirs, for example, I think that I am part
  of GNU. Thinking is not same as really having a position in GNU
  project. 

- and there is GNU project which consists of authorized people who are
  actually providing software and maintaining the GNU project.

- and then within that group there is now a hostile takeover group of
  people starting with Ludovic Courtès and his "fellows" where none of
  them could answer my email to provide me with the facts about their
  statement. They are behaving against established implicit and
  explicit GNU guidelines, and so far nobody from FSF is enforcing any
  policy against them. They are danger to GNU project.

My solution would be radical and simple: ask them to refrain damaging
GNU project, or fork their software, and expell them from GNU project.

AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

> > Let us clean GNU.ORG pages from personal opinions on RMS opinions.
> > 
> > They do not even communicate with each other. There is no
> > friendship or sense of community on such statement.
> > 
> > GNU project was created to get a friendly community of hackers,
> > please see GNU manifesto, and not to endorse separations.

> Again, if someone is quite damaged about some political shit (but
> personally I didn't find anything in RMS opinion) or social justice
> thing he or she should go away, gnu is about technical things and
> there are no place for alternatively mind-gifted people cares about
> ... about nothing, but they own importance.

Exactly, they shall remove themselves from GNU project. Let it be.

So far I know several people have resigned from Guix and GNU due to
their hostile behavior against RMS. Several people have stopped
donating money which is real damage to the FSF.

> > What Ludovic Courtès is doing is exactly that, he is producing
> > hatred, separation, making division in the friendly GNU free
> > software community.
> > 
> > Let me repeat, I do not mind what he is saying against RMS, but I
> > do mind that GNU.ORG is platform for his personal opinions.
> > 
> > Further his statement was never collective how it is called, it
> > was his statement and he asked other people to sign.
> > 
> > My opinion on your signing of that defamatory, harassing, biased
> > and fact-less statement is here:
> > https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Ludovic-Court%C3%A8s-Guix-is-accusing-Stallman-of-Thoughtcrime-on-his-own-domain-GNU-org.html
> > 
> > I am entitling you to your opinion. I could not care less what
> > people write about each other, whatever rumours or facts would
> > be. I don't mind.
> > 
> > But I do not approve on publishing that on GUIX website or GNU.ORG
> > website. Neither I approve of publishing such statements without
> > commenting possibility.
> > 
> > That is why I am asking you to speak out your mind now. I will
> > publish your opinion or lack of opinion. I will publish facts you
> > provide me or lack of those facts.
> > 
> > So far there is no fact that support their statements.
> > 
> > Free speech is human right, and RMS has free speech rights, and
> > why he shall be embarassed, defamed, harassed on his own domain?

> Again, I'm agree with you here.

> > Please FSF and whoever is responsible and acting, join in the
> > quest to remove the off-topic politics from GNU.ORG website pages,
> > so that we stick to promotion of free software, just as quoted
> > from here: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html
> > 
> > The only political positions that the GNU Project endorses are (1)
> > that users should have control of their own computing (for
> > instance, through free software) and (2) supporting basic human
> > rights in computing.
> > 
> > Let those few people NOT represent GNU project, as GNU project
> > never harassed anybody in this manner, and let us not allow
> > selected few of them to destroy those good feelings of community.
> > 
> > Jean
> > 

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1295 bytes --]

Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
> * Alexander Vdolainen <alex@vapaa.xyz> [2019-10-09 23:13]:
> - and then within that group there is now a hostile takeover group of people starting with Ludovic Courtès and his "fellows" where none of them could answer my email to provide me with the facts about their statement. They are behaving against established implicit and explicit GNU guidelines, and so far nobody from FSF is enforcing any policy against them. They are danger to GNU project.
>
> My solution would be radical and simple: ask them to refrain damaging GNU project, or fork their software, and expell them from GNU project.
>
> AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

Wow!  Ease off a bit!

You might not noticed that, but today Guix is the most vivid part of GNU.  And I could not image an action, that might cause more damage to GNU project, than urging Guix lead developers to leave.  Even if you believe that forking software over political discord is good thing to do (despite it does not align well with the rest of your message), by all means, you would not able to outcompete them, so it would simply ended in Guix out of GNU.  So it even more harmful than urging RMS to leave.  After all, RMS is mortal and, alas, will leave us and GNU sooner or later, while Guix is not necessary.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Jean Louis]

It is not harmful if Guix remains free software, how it can be?

It is only harmful for Guix.

It was not my decision, it is theirs.


On October 10, 2019 11:39:42 AM UTC, Dmitry Alexandrov <321942@gmail.com> wrote:
>Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
>> * Alexander Vdolainen <alex@vapaa.xyz> [2019-10-09 23:13]:
>> - and then within that group there is now a hostile takeover group of
>people starting with Ludovic Courtès and his "fellows" where none of
>them could answer my email to provide me with the facts about their
>statement. They are behaving against established implicit and explicit
>GNU guidelines, and so far nobody from FSF is enforcing any policy
>against them. They are danger to GNU project.
>>
>> My solution would be radical and simple: ask them to refrain damaging
>GNU project, or fork their software, and expell them from GNU project.
>>
>> AS SIMPLE AS THAT.
>
>Wow!  Ease off a bit!
>
>You might not noticed that, but today Guix is the most vivid part of
>GNU.  And I could not image an action, that might cause more damage to
>GNU project, than urging Guix lead developers to leave.  Even if you
>believe that forking software over political discord is good thing to
>do (despite it does not align well with the rest of your message), by
>all means, you would not able to outcompete them, so it would simply
>ended in Guix out of GNU.  So it even more harmful than urging RMS to
>leave.  After all, RMS is mortal and, alas, will leave us and GNU
>sooner or later, while Guix is not necessary.

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2420 bytes --]

Did you move it offlist intentionally?  If not, may I resend it back?

Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
> On October 10, 2019 11:39:42 AM UTC, Dmitry Alexandrov <321942@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
>>> * Alexander Vdolainen <alex@vapaa.xyz> [2019-10-09 23:13]:
>>> - and then within that group there is now a hostile takeover group of
>>people starting with Ludovic Courtès and his "fellows" where none of
>>them could answer my email to provide me with the facts about their
>>statement. They are behaving against established implicit and explicit
>>GNU guidelines, and so far nobody from FSF is enforcing any policy
>>against them. They are danger to GNU project.
>>>
>>> My solution would be radical and simple: ask them to refrain damaging
>>GNU project, or fork their software, and expell them from GNU project.
>>>
>>> AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

Have you noticed, that your MUA produces quoting mess in attempt to hardwrap lines while being unable to do that properly?  As there is actually no point in hardwrapping lines, you’d better just disable it rather than trying to fix.

>>Wow!  Ease off a bit!
>>
>>You might not noticed that, but today Guix is the most vivid part of
>>GNU.  And I could not image an action, that might cause more damage to
>>GNU project, than urging Guix lead developers to leave.  Even if you
>>believe that forking software over political discord is good thing to
>>do (despite it does not align well with the rest of your message), by
>>all means, you would not able to outcompete them, so it would simply
>>ended in Guix out of GNU.  So it even more harmful than urging RMS to
>>leave.  After all, RMS is mortal and, alas, will leave us and GNU
>>sooner or later, while Guix is not necessary.
>
> It is not harmful if Guix remains free software, how it can be?

What the point of dubbing some free program an official GNU package nowadays?  In other words, why such thing as GNU software still exists at all, when impulse it gave 35 years ago was successful and free software is not rare anymore?

> It is only harmful for Guix.

I do not see how it can be harmful for Guix.  Not to say, that you are also urging to oust, at least, Guile and GnuPG.

> It was not my decision, it is theirs.

Of course, it up to them, and I hope they have enough respect for GNU and RMS heritage not to follow you strong advice.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[ng0]

Oi.
Shut up and get another audience for your monologue theater act.
I am no longer involved in guix that much, but your trash keeps
piling up in my inbox.

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Jean Louis]

How are you?

On October 10, 2019 12:39:00 PM UTC, Dmitry Alexandrov <321942@gmail.com> wrote:
>Did you move it offlist intentionally?  If not, may I resend it back?

Me for sure not intentionally and Guix managers are anyway conducting censorship... So no big deal.

You can resend what you wish. I am not forbidding two-way free speech.

>>>Wow!  Ease off a bit!

No need. I am not feeling fear when I state something. So they did not ease with thru FUD and defamation on Guix pages on GNU.org domain, so why MD or others should be silenced? No need.

>>>You might not noticed that, but today Guix is the most vivid part of
>>>GNU.  And I could not image an action, that might cause more damage
>to
>>>GNU project, than urging Guix lead developers to leave. 

I don't see absolutely no problem there. And they also not. Their strategy is clear that they want their own community where thought police is to punish thought crime. So I let them be. 

Their behavior does not fit into GNU kind communication guidelines.

And free software can be freely used? So what is the loss? Their only loss is for them to lose other 100000 dollars donation, that is possible reason for their hostile take over attempt.


>>>all means, you would not able to outcompete them, so it would simply
>>>ended in Guix out of GNU.  

I am last person to convince on that as I am aware of their FUD and harm they do to Guix, GNU and RMS. Convince others.

>What the point of dubbing some free program an official GNU package
>nowadays? 

What is point in backstabbing of RMS? I asked and never got answers but FUD.

>I do not see how it can be harmful for Guix.  Not to say, that you are
>also urging to oust, at least, Guile and GnuPG.

No, not at all. I am asking people to behave according to GNU kind communication guidelines. And if they don't like it to step down and make their own platform for their FUD. But using GNU.org domain to defame and harass RMS is disaster for future.

>Of course, it up to them, and I hope they have enough respect for GNU
>and RMS heritage not to follow you strong advice.

They have no respect for RMS. 

Jean Louis

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2417 bytes --]

Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
> How are you?

Ehm...  Fine.  What is the occasion to ask?

> On October 10, 2019 12:39:00 PM UTC, Dmitry Alexandrov <321942@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Did you move it offlist intentionally?  If not, may I resend it back?
>
> Me for sure not intentionally and Guix managers are anyway conducting censorship... So no big deal.

I suppose, they are not in position to censor gnu-system-discuss@gnu.org.

> You can resend what you wish. I am not forbidding two-way free speech.

Done.

>>>>Wow!  Ease off a bit!
>
> No need. I am not feeling fear when I state something. So they did not ease with thru FUD and defamation on Guix pages on GNU.org domain, so why MD or others should be silenced? No need.
>
>>>>You might not noticed that, but today Guix is the most vivid part of GNU.  And I could not image an action, that might cause more damage to GNU project, than urging Guix lead developers to leave.
>
> I [] see absolutely no problem there.

I’m afraid, Dr. Stallman would see.

> And free software can be freely used? So what is the loss?

The loss is hidden behind the question, I suggested you to think on: “What the point of dubbing some free program an official GNU package nowadays?  Why such thing as GNU software still exists at all, when impulse it gave 35 years ago was successful and free software is not rare anymore?”

>>I do not see how it can be harmful for Guix.
>
> Their only loss is for them to lose other 100000 dollars donation, that is possible reason for their hostile take over attempt.

> What is point in backstabbing of RMS? I asked and never got answers but FUD.

To get rid of him, of course.  Why to ask for obvious answer?

>>I do not see how it can be harmful for Guix.  Not to say, that you are also urging to oust, at least, Guile and GnuPG.
>
> No, not at all. I am asking people to behave according to GNU kind communication guidelines.

Many of your letters contain a footer with a call for lead developers of Guix, Guile and GnuPG to leave GNU.  Even if your claim that Guix depends on FSF financially is true, GPG is for sure self-sufficient.

>>Of course, it up to them, and I hope they have enough respect for GNU and RMS heritage not to follow you strong advice.
>
> They have no respect for RMS.

I hope, that you have, though.  And thus will stop to tear down the project he founded.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Jean Louis]

On October 10, 2019 8:29:06 PM UTC, Dmitry Alexandrov <321942@gmail.com> wrote:
>Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
>> How are you?
>
>Ehm...  Fine.  What is the occasion to ask?

We are then from different cultures simply. At my side it is always used similarly as hand shaking.

>> I [] see absolutely no problem there.
>
>I’m afraid, Dr. Stallman would see.

My protest is not to align all my thoughts with Dr. Stallman, my protest is that defamation and harassment of RMS is taking place on Guix.GNU.org website.

It is the code of good conduct of Guix itself where they promised harass-free space with respect to other people's opinions. See: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT

Writing policies while abusing them themselves is hypocrisy and this time it is bad enough that caused international online protests.

>> What is point in backstabbing of RMS? I asked and never got answers
>but FUD.
>
>To get rid of him, of course.  Why to ask for obvious answer?

Well I don't see it that way. I see it as a hostile fact-less thought police punishing and degrading GNU, Guix, FSF and RMS for the thought crime. See the book 1984

>Many of your letters contain a footer with a call for lead developers
>of Guix, Guile and GnuPG to leave GNU. 

Exactly. That is my opinion. If myself cannot agree with my own community's published  coffee of conduct and the founder and if I am to abuse the platform given to me by founder and his work to abuse his image and defame him, then I would never do that, I would step down.

Reason that they don't have guts is all the comfort they got from FSF and GNU which is, was and is being caused by RMS.

Comfort like this https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2018/gnu-guix-receives-donation-from-the-handshake-project/ is hard to resist to get their things straight.

>> They have no respect for RMS.
>
>I hope, that you have, though.  And thus will stop to tear down the
>project he founded.

I have never protested against the GNU project as in itself it cannot cause actions. My protest is not against Ludovic Courtès's opinion neither their free speech, despite all of their efforts to silence every protestors' voice. See their logs for evidences of the plot.

My protest is against defamation of founder of the GNU project and on the GNU project's domain!

If Ludovic Courtès would publish it on his website I could probably comment on his own website. But he did not. By the way I did not find one mention of Dr. Stallman on his pages. Think about that and proper crediting.

Ludovic Courtès published it on Guix website hosted on GNU domain. I am objecting to that. And I am not alone, there are already hundreds supporting comments from all over the world, podcast and defenses, I am not alone thinker and please don't turn my words to something what I have not stated. Same strategy was used to defame Stallman. And same was used by Ludovic Courtès on their disrespectful statement.

Jean 

Reminder to remain civil

[Ricardo Wurmus]

ng0 <ng0@n0.is> writes [something]

Please keep the language here civil.  We don’t need more anger on our
lists.  If you feel frustrated, please take some time off email and (for
example) enjoy the local manifestation of autumn in your physical
environment.  It is of no use to escalate by venting here.

Thanks.

--
Ricardo

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Ruben Safir]

too bad.  Do you need more email space?  I can lend you some



On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 04:44:03PM +0000, ng0 wrote:
> Oi.
> Shut up and get another audience for your monologue theater act.
> I am no longer involved in guix that much, but your trash keeps
> piling up in my inbox.

-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com 

DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive 
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com 

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps, 
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Jens Mølgaard]

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

> Please keep the language here civil.  We don’t need more anger on our
> lists.  If you feel frustrated, please take some time off email [...]

I agree about the language, but I have to say that I share ng0's
sentiment, and I'd like to weigh in for some more moderation of these
topics.

Jean Louis in particular provides good examples of many of the kinds of
behaviour that have been considered unacceptable since the dawn of
electronic communications (and before):

- Spam: Excessive crosposting and directly flooding personal mailboxes.
  It is one thing to invite people to join a relevant discussion in a
  relevant forum (or even ask where to have it), and another to make
  sure everyone receives twenty copies of your email and have no way
  argue against you without adopting the same behaviour.

- Sealioning: Repeatedly demanding "evidence" or "facts" while ignoring
  and refusing to engage with any they are presented with. Claiming to
  be civil while not engaging with arguments and repeatedly driving
  discussions back to square one.

- Copypasta: When emails are not simply resent, but most or all of the
  paragraphs are copied in wholesale from previous messages. The wall of
  text in a reply bears no actual relation to the message it is supposed
  to be a response to.

- Arguing in bad faith: Publicly posting an opinion about how GNU should
  be run is "vile", "harrassment", "defamation" - but demanding the
  "disgusting" people in question be ousted is making "kind requests",
  "entitling people to their opinions". By someone who "could not care
  less what people write about each other". (Quotes, not scare-quotes.
  Slightly out of context, but there is no way to respond reasonably to
  this type of arguing.)

- Demanding answers: No one is entitled to a reply, and the above
  behaviour signals very clearly that the querent is not interested in one.

This kind of behaviour typically has two possible outcomes. Either
everyone who disagrees gives up and leaves, leaving behind the derailing
person feeling self-righteous and vindicated. Or the derailing person
gets ejected from the space, leaving them feeling self-righteous and
vindicated. Neither outcome is particularly desirable.

Personally, I think putting some people in a moderation queue is a good
idea. In that case, the criteria for letting through a message shouldn't
be that it meets the absolute minimum requirement of civility, but that
it contributes to the discussion. I.e. that it doesn't just restate the
same argument, that is is not just copy pasted from a previous message,
and that it is actually responding to the message it is a reply to.

Info-dumping is not necessary or helpful either. If someone needs to
refer to a previous argument or one that is stated elsewhere (which
can't be quoted in a line or two) it is easy to link directly to the
email in question or the blog post etc. Most of the good points that
can be made have already been made elsewhere.

Finally, I am very grateful for the new co-maintainers of Guix! I hope
the rest of us can do our part in keeping the mailing lists on track, so
you don't have too much pointless work in moderating them...

-Jens

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Jens Mølgaard <jens@zete.tk> writes:

> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:
>
>> Please keep the language here civil.  We don’t need more anger on our
>> lists.  If you feel frustrated, please take some time off email [...]
>
> I agree about the language, but I have to say that I share ng0's
> sentiment, and I'd like to weigh in for some more moderation of these
> topics.

You and I agree.  We have already pointed out to Jean Louis that this
behaviour is unacceptable on our mailing lists.  Posts from
non-subscribers are also moderated since a few days.

> Personally, I think putting some people in a moderation queue is a good
> idea.

This is the next step.

Thank you for your support!

-- 
Ricardo

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Jean Louis]

* Kete via Discussions about the development of the GNU system <gnu-system-discuss@gnu.org> [2019-10-12 03:28]:
> On 10/11/2019 04:43 PM, Alexander Vdolainen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 10/11/19 11:16 PM, Kete via Discussions about the development of the
> > GNU system wrote:
> >> On 10/10/2019 05:02 PM, Jean Louis wrote:
> > ... skipped ...
> >>> Well I don't see it that way. I see it as a hostile fact-less thought police punishing and degrading GNU, Guix, FSF and RMS for the thought crime. See the book 1984
> >>>
> >> I think there's more to it than thoughts. I think RMS said something
> >> offensive and has made MIT a toxic environment for women for many years.
> >>
> > Where did you get this bullshit ?
> >
> https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794

There are already numerous refutals and analyzes on that.

https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UbQ1kc1vQU or
https://watchkin.com/y/7UbQ1kc1vQU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE

Try to watch YouTube videos by using hypervideo or youtube
downloaders.

That is biased articles and even if all that is true, GNU project
shall be socially and politically independent of all of the opinions
of their leader or developers.

Because if we would join the GNU project for reason of what their
individual members are thinking, then it is not GNU project any more.

That we agree on GNU as free operating system, that is what we share
in common and any other opinion outside of GNU as Free Operating
System shall be discussed outside of the GNU websites.

I don't mind if such opinions are discussed on mailing lists supported
by GNU, as such allow two-way communication and responses.

What I am protesting is that rumor mongering is ruining the Guix
project of being politically independent, they are taking their side
to feminists politics, or call it how you want, I don't even know,
but that they are taking their side to certain political movements
others than free software movement, is what is damaging the GNU as
politically independent (other politics but free software).

RMS is not require to remain politically independent but he does not
share his political viewpoints on GNU project, not others but free
software movement. That is why he has non-GNU www.stallman.org
website.

Same shall be done by everybody who is supporting GNU project but has
political stances on other politics but free software, they shall
publish such opinions on their websites not related to GNU projects.

Jean

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Jean Louis]

* Alexandre François Garreau <galex-713@galex-713.eu> [2019-10-11 13:53]:
> Le jeudi 10 octobre 2019 12:24:35 CEST, vous avez écrit :
> > * Alexandre François Garreau <galex-713@galex-713.eu> [2019-10-10 11:55]:
> > > > I don't know how to defend anybody in public by silencing talk.
> > > 
> > > Answering whenever appropriate, currently only when asked to, and keep
> > > going this way.
> > 
> > I have no such mentality.
> > 
> > I am doing for RMS what I would like that other people do for
> > me. Stand up and raise the voice. Not wait. That is not me.
> 
> Maybe if you were in the position of rms you would think differently, better 
> acknowledging the different tensions et pressions out there.

Dear Alexandre,

I am sorry, I will take this to the mailing list, not let it be
private.

I do not know what RMS thinks, what I know is that GNU project shall
remain apolitical. The only politics that GNU project shall support is
"(1) that users should have control of their own computing (for
instance, through free software) and (2) supporting basic human rights
in computing. We don't require you as a contributor to agree with
these two points, but you do need to accept that our decisions will be
based on them." See:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html

RMS has upheld the above points, and was always apolitical in regards
to free software. He knows well that free software can be used to
prevent abortions, and to make abortions. For example it could be
possible to make an automatic robotic hand that does abortion()
function without presence of doctors, and such could be done with free
software.

I know it because I have read freedom zero: "The freedom to run the
program as you wish" -- so it means AS YOU WISH. To kill, or prevent
killing, to abort or not about() I don't care. I am distributing free
software and truly giving that freedom to others.

GNU project shall remain apolitical for anything but free
software.

Thus feminist views of Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other
feminists that have published their defaming and libelous statement
on: https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
are not welcome on GNU project.

They are preventing contra-feminists to join the Guix project, GNU
project, due to their political views.

GNU project is welcoming feminists, and contra-feminists, but for as
long as the GNU project is not abused to spread out their propaganda.

And nobody is preventing them to publish their opinions outside of GNU
project. If they have balls for that.

Jean Louis

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Kete via Discussions about the development of the GNU system]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3799 bytes --]

On 10/12/2019 05:19 AM, Jean Louis wrote:
> https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman
"In short: Stallman made some technically-correct-but-utterly-tactless
comments...."

Here are the comments:

    “deceased AI ‘pioneer’ Marvin Minsky (who is accused of assaulting
    one of Epstein’s victims [2])”

    The injustice is in the word “assaulting”. The term “sexual assault”
    is so vague....

    The word “assaulting” presumes that he applied force or violence, in
    some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing.
    Only that they had sex.

    We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that
    she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was
    being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her
    to conceal that from most of his associates.

    I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it
    is absolutely wrong to use the term “sexual assault” in an accusation.

I'm unhappy to see dozens if not hundreds of emails and blog posts that
regurgitate Stallman's exact argument, "taking claims that someone did X
and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X." If
all of this Stallman logic produces such braindead puppetry, then it is
indeed time for new leaders, people who will embrace critical thought.
Besides, there is no way these men are getting these transactions
without assault or coercion taking place. Just because Epstein mediated
that force so that the clients didn't have to get their hands dirty is
no reason to make a stink over how preying on defenseless people in a
peaceful manner is not violence. There is no way they could do that
without someone doing the violence for them. The money cleans that from
their conscience, but they are still involved with the abuse because it
is part of the service that they buy.

> https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UbQ1kc1vQU or
> https://watchkin.com/y/7UbQ1kc1vQU
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE
>
> Try to watch YouTube videos by using hypervideo or youtube
> downloaders.
>
> That is biased articles and even if all that is true, GNU project
> shall be socially and politically independent of all of the opinions
> of their leader or developers.
>
> Because if we would join the GNU project for reason of what their
> individual members are thinking, then it is not GNU project any more.
>
> That we agree on GNU as free operating system, that is what we share
> in common and any other opinion outside of GNU as Free Operating
> System shall be discussed outside of the GNU websites.
>
> I don't mind if such opinions are discussed on mailing lists supported
> by GNU, as such allow two-way communication and responses.
>
> What I am protesting is that rumor mongering is ruining the Guix
> project of being politically independent, they are taking their side
> to feminists politics, or call it how you want, I don't even know,
> but that they are taking their side to certain political movements
> others than free software movement, is what is damaging the GNU as
> politically independent (other politics but free software).
>
> RMS is not require to remain politically independent but he does not
> share his political viewpoints on GNU project, not others but free
> software movement. That is why he has non-GNU www.stallman.org
> website.
>
> Same shall be done by everybody who is supporting GNU project but has
> political stances on other politics but free software, they shall
> publish such opinions on their websites not related to GNU projects.
>
> Jean

-- 
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5630 bytes --]

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Quiliro Ordóñez]

El 2019-10-12 03:32, Ricardo Wurmus escribió:
> Jens Mølgaard <jens@zete.tk> writes:
> 
>> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:
>>
>>> Please keep the language here civil.  We don’t need more anger on our
>>> lists.  If you feel frustrated, please take some time off email [...]
>>
>> I agree about the language, but I have to say that I share ng0's
>> sentiment, and I'd like to weigh in for some more moderation of these
>> topics.
> 
> You and I agree.  We have already pointed out to Jean Louis that this
> behaviour is unacceptable on our mailing lists.  Posts from
> non-subscribers are also moderated since a few days.
> 
>> Personally, I think putting some people in a moderation queue is a good
>> idea.
> 
> This is the next step.
> 
> Thank you for your support!

So we are officially on a censored list, where the ones in power of the
administration and their followers control the others' speech because
there is not an agreement on netiquette on others' terms but on the
terms they impose. That is the usual way oppressive regimes justify
their proceedings. It is not a way that kind people proceed.

If there is a real intention of safety and kind communication, I suggest
to avoid censorship, even if the best communication procedures follow
the netiquette you propose (and to which I agree upon, except for the
censorship which you chose to call moderation). I suggest to try and
keep civility by showing and suggesting civility instead of imposing it.
Imposing it would be absolutely non-civil.

Regarding that the "civil" people abandon the list, I suggest to propose
those who agree with the censors to create a list where they invite only
the ones that think such moderation is acceptable. When a person has
entered that list and has accepted and later refused to accept those
terms, it is also their right to change their mind. All freedom in
history has been gained that way. So that way you are not censoring
anyone, you are just sharing you personal space with the ones which
agree with you. But if you would do that, you would be alone unless you
find someone that has no opinion and is only obeying you. At some point,
there is always imposition if there is censorship.

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> writes:

> So we are officially on a censored list […]

This is not the place to argue about this.  help-guix is not for you to
elaborate on what you consider censorship, it is a list for people to
get help with Guix.

Please respect this.

-- 
Ricardo

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Quiliro Ordóñez]

El 2019-10-13 15:07, Ricardo Wurmus escribió:
> Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> writes:
> 
>> So we are officially on a censored list […]
> 
> This is not the place to argue about this.  help-guix is not for you to
> elaborate on what you consider censorship, it is a list for people to
> get help with Guix.
> 
> Please respect this.

Is this a threat to censor me too? please be frank.

Your argument is exactly the same one used against all protests. But
activism is the occupation of space not destined to such acts because it
is where the perpetrators feel it most.

The best thing is not to throw the fact under the rug, but to address it
in a way that the affected ones can accept as well as the ones in power.
I ask you to please respect this.

Re: Proposal to remove the off-topic, not free software related thoughtcrime accusations from the Guix project pages on GNU.ORG websitew

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le dimanche 13 octobre 2019, 15:05:06 CEST Kete via Discussions about the 
development of the GNU system a écrit :
> Besides, there is no way these men are getting these transactions
> without assault or coercion taking place. Just because Epstein mediated
> that force so that the clients didn't have to get their hands dirty is
> no reason to make a stink over how preying on defenseless people in a
> peaceful manner is not violence. There is no way they could do that
> without someone doing the violence for them. The money cleans that from
> their conscience, but they are still involved with the abuse because it
> is part of the service that they buy.

What rms said is that Minsky wouldn’t have been *aware* of it.  And there’s a 
difference between doing, supporting, ordering, knowing, and unknowingly 
benefiting, especially legally.

Anyway, it was already said that Minsky didn’t do anything:

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> writes:

> El 2019-10-13 15:07, Ricardo Wurmus escribió:
>> Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> writes:
>>
>>> So we are officially on a censored list […]
>>
>> This is not the place to argue about this.  help-guix is not for you to
>> elaborate on what you consider censorship, it is a list for people to
>> get help with Guix.
>>
>> Please respect this.
>
> Is this a threat to censor me too? please be frank.

No, but I have put messages from you under moderation.  This means that
they will not automatically be published to all subscribers of this list
when they are not on topic.

It is incredibly disrespectful to the dozens of people who are
subscribed to this list for the purpose of helping others with Guix.
Your abuse of this list and refusal to take whatever off-topic
discussion you may want to pursue to a more appropriate place leaves me
no choice but to enforce the rules that apply to posting here.

--
Ricardo

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[quiliro]

On Mon, October 14, 2019 2:41 am, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>
> Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> writes:
>
>> El 2019-10-13 15:07, Ricardo Wurmus escribió:
>>> Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> So we are officially on a censored list […]
>>>
>>> This is not the place to argue about this.  help-guix is not for you to
>>> elaborate on what you consider censorship, it is a list for people to
>>> get help with Guix.
>>>
>>> Please respect this.
>>
>> Is this a threat to censor me too? please be frank.
>
> No, but I have put messages from you under moderation.  This means that
> they will not automatically be published to all subscribers of this list
> when they are not on topic.

This is a paradox. "No censorship" is contrary to "no automatic
publication". It is either free to reach the mailing list without control
(except by automatic machine spamming) or censored by the censors
(whatever they want to call themselves: protectors of the common good,
authorities, kings, presidents, prime ministers, bureaucrats, moderators,
teachers or parents). Avoiding to call it as it is, does not make it
better or worse. Censorship is just a [common] practice of a minority
(which sometimes controls the majority) against another minority.

> It is incredibly disrespectful to the dozens of people who are
> subscribed to this list for the purpose of helping others with Guix.
> Your abuse of this list and refusal to take whatever off-topic
> discussion you may want to pursue to a more appropriate place leaves me
> no choice but to enforce the rules that apply to posting here.

Ricardo, I disagree with you. I think that the utmost disrespect for
anyone isn't failing to follow imposed rules, but to control others' free
speech (among other rights). Everyone is free to ignore or argue against
someone else in an environment provided with free speech. But censorship
(either by rules or by personal judgement) eliminates this basic human
right. I hope you can notice this as I have. I used to think imposition
changed things for the better. But it does not on the long run. I hope you
let others have their own opinion on this topic also. Even if every person
except one on this list disagrees with me, that is a good reason to avoid
censorship. Even if no person agreed with me, it would be good that the
other people see the list archive to know about the position some Guix
people have about this subject.

Remember Voltaire about his defense of others' rights. With such respect
and greatest regards,

Quiliro

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Tonton]

Quiliro, this is not about censorship. No one is taking away your right to
express yourself. This channel however is not public, even though it comes
close. This channel also has a set topic.

This is just another drop in the ocean. No one will fix anything while the
storm is raging.

I think I can see where your anger stems from, it could be positive to
have somewhere to talk about the issues that have surfaced over the last week
or so, in addition to other similar things that come forth now and again.

At the same time I've been watching the list and seeing the behaviour from
some of the participants in these discussions makes me doubt if it would
bring anything other than more hatred and aggression. And that makes me
grieve.

I hope you stop this fight, your energy is much needed elsewhere. Guix needs
our cooperation and willingness to work together despite differences of
opinion.
-- 
    :)

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[ison]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2019, Tonton wrote:
> Quiliro, this is not about censorship. No one is taking away your right to
> express yourself. This channel however is not public, even though it comes
> close. This channel also has a set topic.
> 
> This is just another drop in the ocean. No one will fix anything while the
> storm is raging.
> 
> I think I can see where your anger stems from, it could be positive to
> have somewhere to talk about the issues that have surfaced over the last week
> or so, in addition to other similar things that come forth now and again.
> 
> At the same time I've been watching the list and seeing the behaviour from
> some of the participants in these discussions makes me doubt if it would
> bring anything other than more hatred and aggression. And that makes me
> grieve.
> 
> I hope you stop this fight, your energy is much needed elsewhere. Guix needs
> our cooperation and willingness to work together despite differences of
> opinion.
> -- 
>     :)
> 

I think the point he's making is that politics was already introduced by the
article on the official Guix blog, and that it seems somewhat hostile to be
able to post politics on the official site and then say nobody can discuss it
on the mailing list.
He isn't the one who introduced politics to the Guix community. The founder
did that, and the current state of things is really just what should have been
expected by them from the very beginning: political arguing.

I think it's unreasonable for anyone to expect that you can publish articles
like that without any backlash. It just can't happen.

Are we going to see more petitions posted on the official Guix site in the
future? Which topics are ok and which ones are going too far?

Can anyone get a petition posted on the Guix site if they have 20+ signers?
Or does that only happen if Ludovic Courtès agrees with it?

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Quiliro Ordóñez]

These are very good questions:

> Are we going to see more petitions posted on the official Guix site in the
> future? Which topics are ok and which ones are going too far?
> 
> Can anyone get a petition posted on the Guix site if they have 20+ signers?
> Or does that only happen if Ludovic Courtès agrees with it?

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Quiliro Ordóñez]

El 2019-10-14 14:52, Tonton escribió:
> Quiliro, this is not about censorship. No one is taking away your right to
> express yourself. This channel however is not public, even though it comes
> close. This channel also has a set topic.

For me, it _is_ about censorship. If there is censorship, no amount of
freedom on other areas is worthy.

How can the policy of a a group be off-topic for the group? Censorship
in this mailing list is the policy or it is not. Avoiding to be clear or
to soften its impact by giving justifications or changing its name for
moderation, only makes matters worse.

> This is just another drop in the ocean. No one will fix anything while the
> storm is raging.

A feeling is not quenched by ignoring other people's feelings and
values. The storm will calm quickly when all people's feelings are out
in the open and an agreement is reached without impositions. We do not
have to agree on everything, just the basic to carry on. Other
alternatives will cause even more pain for everyone. Even the most
productive and speedy work can be hindered by misunderstandings.

> I think I can see where your anger stems from, it could be positive to
> have somewhere to talk about the issues that have surfaced over the last week
> or so, in addition to other similar things that come forth now and again.

For me, it all starts with the exclusion from the blog post and
subsequent refusal to accept another point of view on an equal space.
Then it was about how I found out about the strange goings regarding
presumptions of nonfree software on the Guix repos and the admins not
taking the matter seriously and rather avoiding to make all effort to
find it and remove it. And now the threat to be censored is, for some,
enough to avoid expressing themselves for fear of becoming ostracized
and for others it is a humiliation.

Free speech is one basic rights of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. If that is irrespected, there is nothing in this project but
software. There would be no more freedom: speech or FSDG.

My messages could have been avoided and I would have just thought about
this and not expressed it. But for me, it is the right of the members of
this list to know about my position, instead of receiving a blow from
the back as has happened to others in the community lately.

> At the same time I've been watching the list and seeing the behaviour from
> some of the participants in these discussions makes me doubt if it would
> bring anything other than more hatred and aggression. And that makes me
> grieve.

I think that aggression is on the mind of the hurt. If the target does
not feel hurt, it causes little damage. A person can be angry and hurt.
A person can try to cause damage. But the most damage can be only caused
by the target herself. The blog post has caused more damage to Guix than
any of the messages which expressed disagreement.

> I hope you stop this fight, your energy is much needed elsewhere. Guix needs
> our cooperation and willingness to work together despite differences of
> opinion.

This is not a fight (at least for me). It is a desperate intent of
saving Guix from being an unwelcome project. I agree there is a lot of
energy consumption. But I think Guix deserves this right to self
defense. Cooperation can only be attained by inclusion and mutual
acceptance, instead of impositions. Those have been my intentions from
the start of this problem. I have tried to be civil and respectful; not
in a false, superficial and diplomatic way; but in a sincere and frank
attitude. I hope this message is taken in that context.

I don't think trust can be recovered after the previous attitudes from
all sides. But we can at least cooperate separately, if we can reach an
agreement.

Happy hacking!
Quiliro

Re: Reminder to remain civil

[Quiliro Ordóñez]

El 2019-10-14 02:41, Ricardo Wurmus escribió:
> Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> writes:
> 
>> El 2019-10-13 15:07, Ricardo Wurmus escribió:
>>> Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> So we are officially on a censored list […]
>>>
>>> This is not the place to argue about this.  help-guix is not for you to
>>> elaborate on what you consider censorship, it is a list for people to
>>> get help with Guix.
>>>
>>> Please respect this.
>>
>> Is this a threat to censor me too? please be frank.
> 
> No, but I have put messages from you under moderation.  This means that
> they will not automatically be published to all subscribers of this list
> when they are not on topic.
> 
> It is incredibly disrespectful to the dozens of people who are
> subscribed to this list for the purpose of helping others with Guix.
> Your abuse of this list and refusal to take whatever off-topic
> discussion you may want to pursue to a more appropriate place leaves me
> no choice but to enforce the rules that apply to posting here.
> 
> --
> Ricardo

I guess you have put quiliro+listas@riseup.net on moderation and not
quiliro@riseup.net. I choose to believe you have done it in good faith
to show that Guix does not censor. Thank you for this respectful
attitude.