Joint statement on the GNU Project

Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ludovic Courtès]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 611 bytes --]

Hello Guix!

We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
Project, are publishing this statement today:

  https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/

We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.  (Ricardo and
I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
on-board.)

This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
questions you may have.  :-)

Ludo’.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jesse Gibbons]

On Mon, 2019-10-07 at 16:32 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello Guix!
> 
> We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> Project, are publishing this statement today:
> 
>   https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
> 
> We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
> but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.  (Ricardo and
> I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
> on-board.)
> 
> This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
> but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
> questions you may have.  :-)
> 
> Ludo’.
Is there an alternative list where we can have an in-depth discussion?

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1199 bytes --]

Just for curiosity, about this:
"Yet, we must also acknowledge that Stallman’s behavior over the years has
undermined a core value of the GNU project"

Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?
What is the reason of that statement?
What you want to get with that?

Regards!

El lun., 7 oct. 2019 a las 21:25, Jesse Gibbons (<jgibbons2357@gmail.com>)
escribió:

> On Mon, 2019-10-07 at 16:32 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > Hello Guix!
> >
> > We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> > Project, are publishing this statement today:
> >
> >   https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
> >
> > We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
> > but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.  (Ricardo and
> > I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
> > on-board.)
> >
> > This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
> > but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
> > questions you may have.  :-)
> >
> > Ludo’.
> Is there an alternative list where we can have an in-depth discussion?
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1768 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote:
> Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?

Perhaps
https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88

Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement.

Regards,
Florian

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jan]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 10:19:28 +0200
"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote:
> > Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?  
> 
> Perhaps
> https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
> 
> Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement.
> 
> Regards,
> Florian
> 

I would like to note a lot of articles on the Internet purposely
misquote Stallman. For example this header from your link:
"Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely
Willing’".
He didn't defend Epstein, he had actually called him a "serial rapist"
earlier, also in the mail he didn't say "victims", note the plural. He
also said the victim could be *presented* to Minsky as entirely willing,
he didn't say she actually was. Language is a really subtle tool and
small things like this can make a big change.

So please, be careful, when reading those articles and judge wisely,
especially because the situation is a really delicate matter.

I also found the link to arguments defending Stallman:
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

I don't really know what should I think about all of this, but it
would be a bit unjust if Stallman didn't have any defense, even if he
made a mistake.


Hope I won't get excluded from the project, because of my opinion,
Jan

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jesse Gibbons]

On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 12:32 +0200, Jan wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 10:19:28 +0200
> "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote:
> > > Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?  
> > 
> > Perhaps
> > https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e78
> > 4f88
> > 
> > Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Florian
> > 
> 
> I would like to note a lot of articles on the Internet purposely
> misquote Stallman. For example this header from your link:
> "Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely
> Willing’".
> He didn't defend Epstein, he had actually called him a "serial rapist"
> earlier, also in the mail he didn't say "victims", note the plural. He
> also said the victim could be *presented* to Minsky as entirely willing,
> he didn't say she actually was. Language is a really subtle tool and
> small things like this can make a big change.
> 
> So please, be careful, when reading those articles and judge wisely,
> especially because the situation is a really delicate matter.
> 
> I also found the link to arguments defending Stallman:
> https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
> 
> I don't really know what should I think about all of this, but it
> would be a bit unjust if Stallman didn't have any defense, even if he
> made a mistake.
> 
> 
> Hope I won't get excluded from the project, because of my opinion,
> Jan
Well, after reading both articles I learned some things about RMS I didn't
want or need to know. My concerns are resolved.

==Please leave me out of further replies.==

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Jan <tona_kosmicznego_smiecia@interia.pl> [2019-10-08 06:33]:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 10:19:28 +0200
> "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote:
> > > Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?  
> > 
> > Perhaps
> > https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
> > 
> > Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Florian
> > 
> 
> I would like to note a lot of articles on the Internet purposely
> misquote Stallman. For example this header from your link:
> "Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely
> Willing’".
> He didn't defend Epstein, he had actually called him a "serial rapist"
> earlier, also in the mail he didn't say "victims", note the plural. He
> also said the victim could be *presented* to Minsky as entirely willing,
> he didn't say she actually was. Language is a really subtle tool and
> small things like this can make a big change.

That is right.

Facts here:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/

> So please, be careful, when reading those articles and judge wisely,
> especially because the situation is a really delicate matter.

They are not judging wisely. That is a fact too. They have joined the
mob as they know nothing better.

> I also found the link to arguments defending Stallman:
> https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
> 
> I don't really know what should I think about all of this, but it
> would be a bit unjust if Stallman didn't have any defense, even if he
> made a mistake.

There is no defense in their new community. I hope they start calling
it GNG or GNU is Not GNU.

> Hope I won't get excluded from the project, because of my opinion,

You see, that is exactly the fear, if you have different opinion you
are in fear to get excluded from GNU. In radio and newspapers business
one says that if one person expresses opinion in writing, one has to
think of 1000 other people who has the same opinion, they just could
not express themselves.

That is happening because those people are abusing GNU project for the
hostile take over.

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.


Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Adam Pribyl]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1757 bytes --]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019, Jan wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 10:19:28 +0200
> "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote:
>>> Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?
>>
>> Perhaps
>> https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
>>
>> Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Florian
>>
>
> I would like to note a lot of articles on the Internet purposely
> misquote Stallman. For example this header from your link:
> "Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely
> Willing’".
> He didn't defend Epstein, he had actually called him a "serial rapist"
> earlier, also in the mail he didn't say "victims", note the plural. He
> also said the victim could be *presented* to Minsky as entirely willing,
> he didn't say she actually was. Language is a really subtle tool and
> small things like this can make a big change.
>
> So please, be careful, when reading those articles and judge wisely,
> especially because the situation is a really delicate matter.
>
> I also found the link to arguments defending Stallman:
> https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
>
> I don't really know what should I think about all of this, but it
> would be a bit unjust if Stallman didn't have any defense, even if he
> made a mistake.
>
>
> Hope I won't get excluded from the project, because of my opinion,
> Jan
>
>



I have to second this. I've read the full RMS mails the day they were 
published and was disgusted what media did with this conversation. In this 
case I do not agree with the Guix statement 
joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project...

Adam Pribyl

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1592 bytes --]

pelzflorian,
I read the original source, and that girl in medium take out of context
everything.
Is curious see also how every person who defends Stallman with arguments
was banned in reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StallmanWasRight/comments/d7cpun/meta_to_the_mods_please_tell_us_why_you_removed/f0z8hr6/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=StallmanWasRight&utm_content=t1_f18jmjs

By other side, Stallman replied a internal email in MIT, was not talking in
the name of the FSF or GNU, what is the problem?
should we take all that he think and say in his personal life and pretend
it is as a public speech?

The free software communities has to work with every person with every idea
always in the community we work with respect with each other.
I think IMHO, that everyone do to Stallman was malicious and is an attack
to the free thinking and speech.

IMHO, We want deeply diversity, that means thinking diversity not only
'gender diversity' which is a surface diversity.

More info:
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ This is an analysis of the press
version VS reallity

I hope not be pushed out also to express my opinion.

Regads!


El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 5:19, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) (<
pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de>) escribió:

> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote:
> > Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?
>
> Perhaps
>
> https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
>
> Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement.
>
> Regards,
> Florian
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2503 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> [2019-10-08 10:37]:
> The free software communities has to work with every person with
> every idea always in the community we work with respect with each
> other.  I think IMHO, that everyone do to Stallman was malicious and
> is an attack to the free thinking and speech.

That is exactly how I imagine GNU community, to be friendly and kind.

However, this time, those people who are trying to represent all of
the GNU maintainers, they have broken the policies of good
behavior.

Let us face the fact, GNU project is RMS's GNU project. It is his. He
created it. He could have make it private company, he made a
non-profit FSF. He could have gain, he did not gain. He has troubles
finding home, he probably got those troubles because of rumor
mongering people.

Is that the "Thank you" to RMS?

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

> More info:
> https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ This is an analysis of the press
> version VS reallity
> 
> I hope not be pushed out also to express my opinion.

That is exactly it!

It is not only you. People are in fear to express their opinion and
ALSO BE ACCUSSED OF THOUGHTCRIME. Mob. Lynch.

If this would be taking place 100 years ago in a village, RMS would be
already hanging.

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> [2019-10-08 04:19]:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote:
> > Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?
> 
> Perhaps
> https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
> 
> Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement.

Get the facts here:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/

Do not support rumors and fact-less thoughtcrime[1] lynching.

They do not represent GNU.

If anybody finds something wrong with the organization the first step
is to disassociate themselves.

Second step is to go out of it.

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Jean

Footnotes:
[1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> [2019-10-07 22:00]:
> Just for curiosity, about this:
> "Yet, we must also acknowledge that Stallman’s behavior over the years has
> undermined a core value of the GNU project"
> 
> Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?
> What is the reason of that statement?
> What you want to get with that?

He said to me on IRS chat it is abort() joke, then he mentioned to
somebody Emacs Virgin joke.

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS to step down and
resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not deserve
funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo Wurmus, Matt
Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy Wingo, Jordi
Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor, Werner Koch, Daiki
Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, John Wiegley, Tom
Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian Jackson, Tobias
Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John W. Eaton, RESIGN
and step down from GNU projects, disassociate yourself, find another
house for your excessive and uncrontollable fear of the free speech.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Jesse,

Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357@gmail.com> skribis:

> Is there an alternative list where we can have an in-depth discussion?

Unfortunately GNU maintainers have having this discussion on private
mailing lists.

However, I suppose you could raise it for example on
<https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/admindb/gnu-misc-discuss>.

Thank you,
Ludo’.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Pierre Neidhardt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 189 bytes --]

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Unfortunately GNU maintainers have having this discussion on private
> mailing lists.

Why?

-- 
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/

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

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> writes:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Unfortunately GNU maintainers have having this discussion on private
>> mailing lists.
>
> Why?

Private GNU mailing lists have existed for years.  They are currently
being used for discussing this (and they were in use before that).  This
doesn’t mean that all GNU maintainers are happy with having discussions
on private lists.

--
Ricardo

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-08 07:17]:
> 
> Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> writes:
> 
> > Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
> >
> >> Unfortunately GNU maintainers have having this discussion on private
> >> mailing lists.
> >
> > Why?
> 
> Private GNU mailing lists have existed for years.  They are currently
> being used for discussing this (and they were in use before that).  This
> doesn’t mean that all GNU maintainers are happy with having discussions
> on private lists.
> 
> --
> Ricardo

Can you then please CORRECT the bully statement and make it right?

So far various social networks are interpreting it as "all GNU
maintainers". That statement is thus making damage to GNU project,
damage to GUIX project, defaming and harassing RMS, bringing hatred
in the community. 


Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> [2019-10-08 04:48]:
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > Unfortunately GNU maintainers have having this discussion on private
> > mailing lists.
> 
> Why?

Because it is conspiracy that shall not be placed and given to public
discussion. The fact that RMS knows about their discussion does not
make it less secret plot of a hostile take over.

And you can be sure that more hostility towards GNU project is
prepared even beyond their secret mailing list.

Because they know that they would not have any chance, would they
allow public comments, they would need to face the mob.

Because they are intimidating the community.

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
> lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep disrupting
> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.

I cannot expect anything else from you.

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Jean-Louis,

Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> skribis:

> * Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
>> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
>> lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep disrupting
>> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
>
> I cannot expect anything else from you.

You’ve made your point now; I see you’ve even set up a web page to
collect hatred messages against me.

I ask you to stop using the Guix mailing lists for this now.  I will
propose to the Guix maintainers to put you on a moderation queue if you
don’t stop by yourself.

Disagreement is fine; attrition is now.

My sincere apologies to all the Guix people who are witnessing this.  :-(

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Thorsten Wilms]

On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:29:08 +0200
Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

> My sincere apologies to all the Guix people who are witnessing
> this.  :-(

After initial enthusiasm, the CoC issue and the reaction to the GNU
Kind Communications Guideline already convinced me that I should better
keep a fair bit of distance. Thus I don't even want to belong to Guix
people, but I'm still an observer. Not that anyone should care.

I don't get what made you guys start Guix as GNU project, if you have
such an issue with Stallman (which I do understand)?

The timing of the announcement makes you appear to join ranks
with people who are repeating lies. If one can't keep a few quotes
straight, I'm not inclined to believe the rest that's harder to
evaluate. It also makes it look like kicking a man when he's already
down.

Then having it on a GNU domain and posting the announcement to a list
where the matter should not be discussed is ... at least
unwise, if not disingenious.

So I have some sympathy with Jean Louis, as silly as the idea of Guix
being anything without you is.


-- 
Thorsten Wilms <t_w_@freenet.de>

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Thorsten,

Thorsten Wilms <t_w_@freenet.de> skribis:

> I don't get what made you guys start Guix as GNU project, if you have
> such an issue with Stallman (which I do understand)?

GNU is not about Stallman, it’s about building a free operating system.
These are idea(l)s I and others here very much support.

I hope this clarifies the situation.

Ludo’.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Stefan Huchler]

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi Jean-Louis,
>
> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> skribis:
>
>> * Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
>>> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
>>> lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep disrupting
>>> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
>>
>> I cannot expect anything else from you.
>
> You’ve made your point now; I see you’ve even set up a web page to
> collect hatred messages against me.
>
> I ask you to stop using the Guix mailing lists for this now.  I will
> propose to the Guix maintainers to put you on a moderation queue if you
> don’t stop by yourself.
>
> Disagreement is fine; attrition is now.
>
> My sincere apologies to all the Guix people who are witnessing this.  :-(
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.

And why are you not on moderation for posting horrible things against
Richard Stallman on a gnu website where he is the leader of the Gnu
Project?

Yes the other guy maybe spams here a bit the malinig list, but the
website read much more people than the mailing list, so you spammed the
internet much more.

It's also not about disagreement, he made clearly the point that he is
fine with your opinion about RMS, he is just not ok with you posting it
on a domain that you don't process. And imply that this is the opinion
of the guix project while there was never a vote on this here.

Is Guix a political Project now? If not why did you post political
statements on that website? So you hurt that project with that move
obviously, how do you justify that?

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Hi Stefan,

[- help-guix]

> Is Guix a political Project now?

The GNU project has always been a political project.  Guix is part of
GNU.

--
Ricardo

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

I have no hate against you and never had. Observe the log. You stated with defamation and FUD, not me.

Your censorship policy is already well known. So block, I don't mind.

You are not answering with facts but bringing more and more fear, uncertainty, and doubts into your own space and destroying GNU project, exactly what you said in the statement. Media has picked you up and perverted your statements due you too man generalizations and lack of facts and specifics. 

My pagd is not against your free speech but your disrespect and defamation on GNU.org domain. I would not care that much if you would have been doing it outside if GNU.org website on your private page. 

Guix got a donation of 100,000 dollars from FSF and that is RMS and RMS supporters creation. That you use the same GNU project which finances and supports Guix to defame and slander RMS without facts is lack of integrity, and it was not me who started it

Next time think before you do. So whinning will not bring you anywher but having balls. What you did to RMS is something you are experiencing right now. I am sorry for you, but you asked for it. 

Numerous people have published their pages yoo, I have not asked them anything, so please you arr getting what you asked for. You started with FUD, face what is happening.

 I have no intention to disturb Guix mailing list. I would support Guix even if it left in its own space of creation of free software and humanitarian rights in that subject. That is what I would do while having such string emotional impressions like statement signers got about RMS. 

And that what you did and how you harmed RMS by using his support is unspoken. 

I am protesting for space that you used for your personal grievances, obviously something you allow only to you and few companions who are defaming RMS without facts.

You don't allow me to use Guix resources to ask you for facts, right? But you like using Guix blog for defamation of RMS? Mamma mia.

You never answered my private email and chat to you, right? Would you, I would not ask you in public. Just have balls, as RMS has got the balls, endure it and be happy.

Wish you good night,
Jean Louis

On October 10, 2019 2:29:08 PM UTC, "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
>Hi Jean-Louis,
>
>Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> skribis:
>
>> * Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
>>> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
>>> lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep
>disrupting
>>> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
>>
>> I cannot expect anything else from you.
>
>You’ve made your point now; I see you’ve even set up a web page to
>collect hatred messages against me.
>
>I ask you to stop using the Guix mailing lists for this now.  I will
>propose to the Guix maintainers to put you on a moderation queue if you
>don’t stop by yourself.
>
>Disagreement is fine; attrition is now.
>
>My sincere apologies to all the Guix people who are witnessing this. 
>:-(
>
>Thanks,
>Ludo’.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Svante Signell]

On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 16:29 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Jean-Louis,

> You’ve made your point now; I see you’ve even set up a web page to
> collect hatred messages against me.
> 
> I ask you to stop using the Guix mailing lists for this now.  I will
> propose to the Guix maintainers to put you on a moderation queue if
> you don’t stop by yourself.
> 
> Disagreement is fine; attrition is now.
> 
> My sincere apologies to all the Guix people who are witnessing
> this.  :-(

Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If you
don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which is the
appropriate mailing list.

Thanks!

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

>Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If you
>don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which is the
>appropriate mailing list.

I don't mind.

Guix developers published biased and factless defamation of RMS on Guix pages. I have told my concerns to them privately and on chat before sending it to mailing list. Would they provide facts, I would refrain.

Obviously the thought police is afraid and must silence defenders of RMS and his works.

So why is it problem to address the same on the Guix making list?

Is it maybe double standard?

Jean Louis
https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Ludovic-Court%C3%A8s-Guix-is-accusing-Stallman-of-Thoughtcrime-on-his-own-domain-GNU-org.html

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Svante Signell]

On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 19:22 +0000, Jean Louis wrote:
> 
> 
> > Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If
> > you don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which
> > is the appropriate mailing list.
> 
> I don't mind.

Sorry Jean Louis, I was addressing Ludovic, not you. I saw that you
already sent some stuff to gnu-system-discuss, have to read that now.
But, please calm down and don't require people to step down. Things has
to be discussed with sensibility in mind, not creating useless flame
wars.

Thanks!

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

Problem is that such statements shall be valid all including for those who created defamatory statements on Guix.GNU.org

Guix shall be hartass-free, but it is not, it is outrageous!

Jean

https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Ludovic-Court%C3%A8s-Guix-is-accusing-Stallman-of-Thoughtcrime-on-his-own-domain-GNU-org.html

On October 10, 2019 8:23:11 PM UTC, Svante Signell <svante.signell@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 19:22 +0000, Jean Louis wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> > Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If
>> > you don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which
>> > is the appropriate mailing list.
>> 
>> I don't mind.
>
>Sorry Jean Louis, I was addressing Ludovic, not you. I saw that you
>already sent some stuff to gnu-system-discuss, have to read that now.
>But, please calm down and don't require people to step down. Things has
>to be discussed with sensibility in mind, not creating useless flame
>wars.
>
>Thanks!

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Svante Signell <svante.signell@gmail.com> [2019-10-10 22:23]:
> On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 19:22 +0000, Jean Louis wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If
> > > you don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which
> > > is the appropriate mailing list.
> > 
> > I don't mind.
> 
> Sorry Jean Louis, I was addressing Ludovic, not you. I saw that you
> already sent some stuff to gnu-system-discuss, have to read that now.
> But, please calm down and don't require people to step down. Things has
> to be discussed with sensibility in mind, not creating useless flame
> wars.

Dear Svante,

I do not "require" anyone to step down as I cannot do that.

I am calling those who have integrity to resign from GNU project, that
is different as it is not a requirement.

They are disgracefully abusing Dr. Richard Stallman, Guix operating
system, GNU project and FSF. Funded by the FSF and third parties
through the FSF with way more than US $100,000, it is disgrace that
their defamatory and libelous statement is published on GNU project
websites, as Guix website is GNU project's website.

They expressed to want to build a different free software project, I
am total supporter of that, but if one does not want to support GNU
project, then I suggest they call it different, software can be
forked, names can be changed, and need not be changed at all. 

It is very very funny, that it started with RMS's statement, as
described here: https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ where
Dr. Richard Stallman wrote, and I am cutting out the context:

"The injustice is in the word "assaulting". The term "sexual assault"
is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation:
taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as
Y, which is much worse than X."

But Ludovic Courtès and the sucession company of his supporters, even
being hackers, cannot understand it at all and continue facilitating
accusation inflation by taking claims that RMS did X and leading
people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X.

The Thoughtpolice[1] Squad of Ludovic Courtès is accusing Dr. Richard
Stallman of thoughtcrime[2] in a manner that is not even appropriate
for criminal offenders. And Richard Stallmen is not a criminal.

I am saddened to see that European born person such as Ludovic Courtès
does not uphold European values such as "nobody is guilty unless
proven" and that for reasons of abort() joke he has decided to defame
and slander on RMS on Guix web pages.

His own website http://web.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ does not speak of
anything related to Dr. Richard Stallman. Like his activity does not
matter alone. I have not seen even mentioning of "free software". I
can just see his own ego and PhD thesis on software and
technicalities, and nothing ideological that I have expected to
see. This speaks of his lack of awareness of importance of free
software and full awareness of technicalities. His ability lies in
hacking, not in leading a GNU project. Without seeing what RMS
continually does for free software, how can he speak to take RMS down
from GNU leadership... it is even not consistent and totally
contradictory with the fact that Guix is supported by RMS, and FSF,
and that huge donation have been sent to Guix by the FSF and third
parties.

The Ludovic Courtès and the succession company have been asked to
provide facts that will justify their statemetn, and they have
none.

They have not allowed comments on their pages, and are just practising
censorship.

It is my opinion that their statements are truly a hostile takeover of
GNU organization and not for reasons of free software and further
development of the GNU project, but for reasons of Ludovic Courtès and
the succession company's desire for authority, powers and funds from
foundations.

Jean

Footnotes:
[1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police

[2]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > I am calling those who have integrity to resign from GNU project, that
  > is different as it is not a requirement.

We need people of integrity in the GNU Project.  I hope people who
have integrity will remain, not resign.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> [2019-10-30 03:04]:
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> 
>   > I am calling those who have integrity to resign from GNU project, that
>   > is different as it is not a requirement.
> 
> We need people of integrity in the GNU Project.  I hope people who
> have integrity will remain, not resign.

If I use Wordnet definitions, it is enough to clarify "integrity".

* Overview of noun integrity

The noun integrity has 2 senses (first 2 from tagged texts)
1. (3) integrity, unity, wholeness -- (an undivided or unbroken completeness or totality with nothing wanting; "the integrity of the nervous system is required for normal development"; "he took measures to insure the territorial unity of Croatia")
2. (1) integrity -- (moral soundness; "he expects to find in us the common honesty and integrity of men of business"; "they admired his scrupulous professional integrity")

Now, how is it morally sound to be supported by GNU Project, by its
founder who created everything for the Guix project to be supported by
GNU Project, and to be supported by the FSF, and then to enjoy
donations of US $100,000 and then for Guix leader to publish
defamatory statements on its own website?

And then to call others to join him in his "Oh, I don't like your
joke" direction, let us "cancel Stallman". What? That is hate movement
within GNU project.

Integrity would mean, for example, to verify the facts, to verify if
the "MIT Episode", as Ludovic mentioned to me, is based on facts or is
it based on rumors, and then to apologize. Integrity means being
friend to GNU project, free software philosophy and friendship that is
established in the project. Not dividing the community.

That somebody got "offended" is not same to "offensive", there was
nothing offensive in the jokes neither in the "MIT episode".

Integrity means being either fully friend or fully enemy.

Integrity would mean to either fully abide by the own Code of Conduct
of Guix and stop with the harassment, or to recognize that one is
enemy of the Guix project, and GNU project, and RMS, and abandon such.

I am not saying what is better, in my opinion, best is to be friends,
and to solve issues by communication, best would be to solve issue
with facts. Obviously one group of people in Guix rows does not
understand any facts, they react overly emotional and think that their
social cause is just and they can destroy what they want.

Or integrity would mean, for example, to take a stance , not
apologize, but then also not pretend to be friend to GNU project and
its core values, as one of its core values was not to introduce other
politics but free software in the project.

I am myself loving Guix and Guile, and would not like seeing
developers go out of the project.

But I have got very bad impression of their ideals and goals, and I
would not like GNU project be run by that type of a group. In my
opinion they are in serious doubt. At one point of time in future,
they may get to senses, but now they are not.

Really good talk on "why everyone is getting so offended". Why Is
Everyone Getting So Offended?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kGBQSXX_GU

Jean

P.S. It wasn't the abort joke, it was a "Federal Censorship" joke.


25.7.4 Aborting a Program

Future Change Warning: Proposed Federal censorship regulations may
prohibit us from giving you information about the possibility of
calling this function. We would be required to say that this is not an
acceptable way of terminating a program.

The above is more humor then a simple joke, it is not "hate speech",
it is a joke. If one does not live in the USA, may take it out of the
context. But that is certainly not a reason for defamation. It's joke.

Finally, Stallman did not say what Ludovic is claiming to be the
problem with the "MIT episode":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UbQ1kc1vQU

Integrity means: to verify the facts and tell what is truth even if it
is not comfortable.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Thompson, David]

Stop sending these incoherent essay length rants to the Guix mailing
lists.  You've made your point dozens of times.  Thanks in advance.

- Dave

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[ison]

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019, Thompson, David wrote:
> Stop sending these incoherent essay length rants to the Guix mailing
> lists.  You've made your point dozens of times.  Thanks in advance.
> 
> - Dave
> 

I find his email to be extremely coherent, lucid, on point, and hardly
containing any elements that I would consider to be a "rant".
Perhaps you should elaborate on what parts you think are incoherent so
someone can help you understand them better?

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, October 10, 2019 7:22 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:

> > Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If you
> > don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which is the
> > appropriate mailing list.
>
> I don't mind.
>
> Guix developers published biased and factless defamation of RMS on Guix pages.

This is what they actually said: "GNU is not fulfilling its mission when the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to."

Which is true, and the funny thing is, it's true by your own admission as well. You said that people attacked RMS for his statement. What is that if not alienation?
I've seen people publicly state that they'll cancel their membership and donate to Conservancy instead of FSF.
And there is this thread by a free software developer who helped draft GPLv3 [1].

As far as I can tell, you have not disproven those statements, so I can only conclude that you either were not aware of them, which would mean that you did not actually look into the problem as deeply as you would want us to believe, or that you were aware of them, but dismissed them as insignificant, which would reflect badly on your value system.

And even before this incident, I've seen people say they don't want to get into free software because of Stallman's behaviour and because people defend him from any criticism.

Don't put Stallman on a pedestal, he is not perfect, and just because he founded GNU doesn't mean he should lead it forever or that he should have final say in everything.

ps.: sorry for writing this on the devel list, but there is so much vitriol against the core devs here already that I felt like I had to counterbalance it.

[1]: https://pleroma.site/notice/9nh9bWH6RbrQinMp1M

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

P,
> And even before this incident, I've seen people say they don't want to
get into free software because of Stallman's behaviour and because people
defend him from any criticism.
So, why didn't you do anything before? why now? If it was a real issue that
would happen in before, not now.

> Don't put Stallman on a pedestal, he is not perfect, and just because he
founded GNU doesn't mean he should lead it forever or that he should have
final say in everything.
I think that is not the problem, no one is perfect, that is why no one
needs to be perfect to represent a group as GNU, then, RMS doesn't need to
be removed because he is not perfect, right?
Also, why use the official Guix website to show that statement, there is a
vote of all the members to do that?

p.s: I'm sorry for text this also, but I don't believe in a SJW speech.

p.s2: A social network text message proof of nothing.



El jue., 10 oct. 2019 a las 17:33, P (<pronaip@protonmail.com>) escribió:

> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Thursday, October 10, 2019 7:22 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>
> wrote:
>
> > > Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If you
> > > don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which is the
> > > appropriate mailing list.
> >
> > I don't mind.
> >
> > Guix developers published biased and factless defamation of RMS on Guix
> pages.
>
> This is what they actually said: "GNU is not fulfilling its mission when
> the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach
> out to."
>
> Which is true, and the funny thing is, it's true by your own admission as
> well. You said that people attacked RMS for his statement. What is that if
> not alienation?
> I've seen people publicly state that they'll cancel their membership and
> donate to Conservancy instead of FSF.
> And there is this thread by a free software developer who helped draft
> GPLv3 [1].
>
> As far as I can tell, you have not disproven those statements, so I can
> only conclude that you either were not aware of them, which would mean that
> you did not actually look into the problem as deeply as you would want us
> to believe, or that you were aware of them, but dismissed them as
> insignificant, which would reflect badly on your value system.
>
> And even before this incident, I've seen people say they don't want to get
> into free software because of Stallman's behaviour and because people
> defend him from any criticism.
>
> Don't put Stallman on a pedestal, he is not perfect, and just because he
> founded GNU doesn't mean he should lead it forever or that he should have
> final say in everything.
>
> ps.: sorry for writing this on the devel list, but there is so much
> vitriol against the core devs here already that I felt like I had to
> counterbalance it.
>
> [1]: https://pleroma.site/notice/9nh9bWH6RbrQinMp1M
>
>

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Vasya Boytsov]

I kindly ask to remove this statement from the Guix site. It's
inappropriate, it's poisonous for the community (you can see this
clearly now). Anyone can have their own opinion in this discussion,
but _PLEASE_ can we divide OS development and politics?
There are more appropriate places to post such statements. Having this
post on a _Guix_ website is very bad for community health.
I want to continue using Guix and contribute some packages, but with
such a political involvement I can't.

On 10/10/19, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:
> P,
>> And even before this incident, I've seen people say they don't want to
> get into free software because of Stallman's behaviour and because people
> defend him from any criticism.
> So, why didn't you do anything before? why now? If it was a real issue that
> would happen in before, not now.
>
>> Don't put Stallman on a pedestal, he is not perfect, and just because he
> founded GNU doesn't mean he should lead it forever or that he should have
> final say in everything.
> I think that is not the problem, no one is perfect, that is why no one
> needs to be perfect to represent a group as GNU, then, RMS doesn't need to
> be removed because he is not perfect, right?
> Also, why use the official Guix website to show that statement, there is a
> vote of all the members to do that?
>
> p.s: I'm sorry for text this also, but I don't believe in a SJW speech.
>
> p.s2: A social network text message proof of nothing.
>
>
>
> El jue., 10 oct. 2019 a las 17:33, P (<pronaip@protonmail.com>) escribió:
>
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>> On Thursday, October 10, 2019 7:22 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > > Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If
>> > > you
>> > > don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which is
>> > > the
>> > > appropriate mailing list.
>> >
>> > I don't mind.
>> >
>> > Guix developers published biased and factless defamation of RMS on Guix
>> pages.
>>
>> This is what they actually said: "GNU is not fulfilling its mission when
>> the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to
>> reach
>> out to."
>>
>> Which is true, and the funny thing is, it's true by your own admission as
>> well. You said that people attacked RMS for his statement. What is that
>> if
>> not alienation?
>> I've seen people publicly state that they'll cancel their membership and
>> donate to Conservancy instead of FSF.
>> And there is this thread by a free software developer who helped draft
>> GPLv3 [1].
>>
>> As far as I can tell, you have not disproven those statements, so I can
>> only conclude that you either were not aware of them, which would mean
>> that
>> you did not actually look into the problem as deeply as you would want us
>> to believe, or that you were aware of them, but dismissed them as
>> insignificant, which would reflect badly on your value system.
>>
>> And even before this incident, I've seen people say they don't want to
>> get
>> into free software because of Stallman's behaviour and because people
>> defend him from any criticism.
>>
>> Don't put Stallman on a pedestal, he is not perfect, and just because he
>> founded GNU doesn't mean he should lead it forever or that he should have
>> final say in everything.
>>
>> ps.: sorry for writing this on the devel list, but there is so much
>> vitriol against the core devs here already that I felt like I had to
>> counterbalance it.
>>
>> [1]: https://pleroma.site/notice/9nh9bWH6RbrQinMp1M
>>
>>
>


-- 

Respectfully,
Boytsov Vasya

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Vasya Boytsov <vasiliy.boytsov@phystech.edu> [2019-10-10 23:03]:
> I kindly ask to remove this statement from the Guix site. It's
> inappropriate, it's poisonous for the community (you can see this
> clearly now). Anyone can have their own opinion in this discussion,
> but _PLEASE_ can we divide OS development and politics?
> There are more appropriate places to post such statements. Having this
> post on a _Guix_ website is very bad for community health.
> I want to continue using Guix and contribute some packages, but with
> such a political involvement I can't.

See my answer here:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2019-10/msg00037.html

That is exactly the problem and the problem was solved but just not
respected by those few who are taking stance on their politics, in
this case feminism movement, Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other
supporters of the pro-feminist politics have published their
pro-feminist statement here:
https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ and
have not openly said what it is, neither stated the fact, but tried to
bring GNU community down for reasons of Thoughtcrime[1].

Ludovic Courtès said to me that reasons are of feminist nature:

- abort() joke, see the IRC log where he said to me it is about abort
  joke and "MIT episode": http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log
  search for "abort".

- see another evidence here where he introduces feminism stances on
  Emacs Virgin jokes: http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log

Basically RMS is guilty of Thoughtcrime[1] and they (those proponent
of feminism movement) would like GNU without people who think different.

GNU project was always a apolitical and independent. That is why there
is freedom zero that anybody can use software for whatever purposes
they wish.

For example somebody could use free software, GPL licensed, to abort()
or prevent-abortion(), or to spy, create wars or prevent wars, publish
nazi propaganda or anti-fascist propaganda.

By introducing politics other but free software into GNU project
pages, those pro-feminist group of GNU maintainers have tried to make
GNU project political.

Jean Louis

Footnotes:
[1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> [2019-10-10 22:52]:
> P,
> > And even before this incident, I've seen people say they don't want to
> get into free software because of Stallman's behaviour and because people
> defend him from any criticism.
> So, why didn't you do anything before? why now? If it was a real issue that
> would happen in before, not now.

GNU project is apolitical. No politics other but free software
please. Guix people, stop with the feminism movement in GNU projects,
open up your feminists websites and speak what you want. But use your
money please, not FSF's please.

I did not pay much money, but I did pay for Guix. Would I know they
are to try to hurt GNU community by introducing their political views,
I would never. 

> > Don't put Stallman on a pedestal, he is not perfect, and just because he
> founded GNU doesn't mean he should lead it forever or that he should have
> final say in everything.

Stallman will always lead GNU, be it alive or dead, because he has
established free software philosophy by which FSF acts, and by which
free software exists.

He is now doing important actions such as planning or influencing
decision makers, something that simple programmers sitting behind
their keyboards cannot understand. See:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/

> I think that is not the problem, no one is perfect, that is why no one
> needs to be perfect to represent a group as GNU, then, RMS doesn't need to
> be removed because he is not perfect, right?

GNU project is not about being perfect but about efficiency in
providing free software.

GNU is functional in itself, it need no feminism or anti fascists or
nazis to help, no politics is welcome in GNU project as GNU software
is for everybody. See freedom zero at
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html and promote freedom zero
also in the behavior of developers.

> Also, why use the official Guix website to show that statement,
> there is a vote of all the members to do that?

There is no vote, they are dictators. It is not democracy.

> p.s: I'm sorry for text this also, but I don't believe in a SJW
> speech.

Sorry I am getting old to understand SJW:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice_warrior

"Social justice warrior" (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual
who promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil
rights, and multiculturalism,[1][2] as well as identity politics.[3]
The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they
are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated
conviction,[4] and engaging in disingenuous arguments.[5]

OK fine, now I get it, that is exactly what GNU project is not for!

GNU project is for everybody, it is not a platform to be abused by
feminists or any kind of political activists!

> p.s2: A social network text message proof of nothing.

Exactly!

Jean Louis

P.S. Please don't make abort() jokes or you are not welcome in Guix.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

Dear P,

See my comments below.

* P <pronaip@protonmail.com> [2019-10-10 22:33]:
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Thursday, October 10, 2019 7:22 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
> 
> > > Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If you
> > > don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which is the
> > > appropriate mailing list.
> >
> > I don't mind.
> >
> > Guix developers published biased and factless defamation of RMS on Guix pages.
> 
> This is what they actually said: GNU is not fulfilling its mission
> when the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we
> want to reach out to.

That is incorrect. GNU is free operating system, and by writing this
from a Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre system it is a simple fact that it is
fullfiling its mission.

Let us be specific and speak of specific facts, concrete, and let us
avoid generalizations. Ludovic Courtès and the succession company by
conducting fears, uncertainty and doubts[1] and by publishing
generalized, fact-less defamation of Dr. Richard Stallman are simply
trying to take over the authority and powers in GNU project.

However, the effect they got is quite opposite, people don't trust
them.

Even people outside of GNU project and those not being supporters of
free software are expressing their opinions on Internet calling them
"traitors" and other bad names that shall not be mentioned at this
place. 

That is the mob's reaction on their libelous statement, based on
emotions, again not on facts. Their libelous statement itself was
based also on emotions and fears of Ludovic Courtès and the succession
company that they will lose their own reputation in their own lives
due to connection to GNU project itself run by Dr. Richard Stallman.

I say this, if my friend is my friend, I stay loyal to my friend,
despite the rumors in background. Rumors are not facts, and there is
no public figure in the world of last 30 years that has not been
attacked by rumors one way or the other.

But rumor is not a fact.

> Which is true, and the funny thing is, it's true by your own
> admission as well.

It is not true.

It is very easy to say "it is true" and accuse RMS and further inflate
accusations.

It is very hard to provide facts.

The fact is that Ludovic Courtès is not a free software activist. He
cannot represent what he said. He is hacker, he is free software
developer, but not activist in the sense that he pushes free software
forward. Do you see the difference in what I am talking about?

Why I am saying this? Because as of now, on his websites I do not see
mentioning of "free software" and any ideas related to free software.

Do you see here on his website any mentioning of the specific term
"free software"?
http://people.bordeaux.inria.fr/lcourtes/

Try searching for this term:

site:hpc.guix.info "free software" on search engines and you will see
his other website https://hpc.guix.info is not mentioning any
advancement of free software. He is hacker, programmer, developer of
free software, but it looks it just happens by chance, he found ground
to do it, which is all good and fine, but he is not public or loud
proponent of free software.

Nowhere on his personal pages he has mentioned important of the GNU
Project and free software and importance of Dr. Richard Stallman.

He likes free software, he develops it, all is fine, there are many
developers like that, and nobody asks him to be proponend or public
proponent for free software, he is free to do what he wish.

However, the fact that Ludovic Courtès is not a public proponent of
free software and that he never mentioned free software movements and
importances of it, that I know, does not qualify him, does not make
him trusted to say what he said on:
https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/

It is my opinion and impression that many GNU developers joined the
GNU project, without being truly aware of free software ideas and
politics.

What did Ludovic Courtès do for free software in last month, or weeks
other but programming? He has just ruined the image of Guix, GNU, FSF
and Richard Stallman, and himself.

What did Richard Stallman do for free software in last 30 days? He
went to Microsoft Research and did a talk on free software. See this
article:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/

That was September 4th 2019.

Did Ludovic Courtès ever did talk on free software?

Or just on Guix, Guile, and other technical stuff that he likes?

Now back to subject of this email, you said that Ludovic Courtès and
his succession company is right and that "GNU is not fullfiling its
mission" due to rumors about RMS, and I have given you my short
research of websites of Ludovic Courtès and have shown you and given
you short research of RMS's deeds in last September 2019, and those
facts are now showing:

1. That Ludovic Courtès never spoke publicly about free software, and
   did not promote free software politics and ideology. He promoted
   free software as such, and is programmer who produces free
   software, and that is good enough. But the distinction is in this
   case important as he is claiming incorrectly that RMS is
   endangering GNU project for rumor's sake.

2. That RMS did the speech in Microsoft Research and pushed forward
   the idea of free software, "covering the importance of free
   software, GPL v3, GNU vs. Linux. He added that "he had a list of
   'small requests': make Github push users to better software license
   hygiene, make hardware manufacturers to publish their hardware
   specs, make it easier to workaround Secure Boot."

That disproves Ludovic Courtès's qualification to say that Dr. Richard
Stallman is not qualified to lead GNU project.

Nobody was EVER qualified to lead GNU project but Richard Stallman.

Ludovic Courtès is not qualified to lead GNU project and make such
statements. He is qualified in technical terms to lead GNU software
projects, not GNU project itself.

GNU Project is primarily idelogical and political. It is not primarily
technical.

People who have signed their disgraceful statements are not
ideologists:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/
they are programmers, and I respect each of them what they do in their
programming field.

They are not qualified to replace GNU leadership for reasons that they
have not done anything of ideological value for GNU proejct in that
sense to replace RMS!

Their opinions are invalid. Their opinions are based on their emotions
and lack of experience in the life. Their opinions are based on rumors
and fact-less biased generalizations. None of them could give facts.

A person which could be maybe qualified to say that Dr. Richard
Stallman is not qualified to lead GNU project, could be Eben
Moglen. He was enforcing the GNU GPL license and worked with FSF in
past. He was heavily involved with drafing of the GNU GPL. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eben_Moglen

Now if he would say at this point or any point of time: "Dr. Stallman
is not disgracing the GNU project because he has long beard and long
hair and French public would rather like to see him nicely trimmed" --
I would laugh about it, and move on. And if Eben Moglen would say that
Dr. Richard Stallman is not doing good for GNU project, then he would
state the facts, and such facts do not exist now. But if he would
state facts, I would not laugh about it, but would rather look into
the facts.

I have asked for facts from Ludovic Courtès and his succession
company, and I got no facts.

I am not in doubt that Dr. Richard Stallman did GOOD to the world with
the GNU project establishment.

Jean Louis

Footnotes:
[1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty,_and_doubt

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

Dne 11. 10. 19 v 9:45 Ludovic Courtès napsal(a):
> Nice.  This list is about Guix development though.  My email was
> directed at the Guix developers and it’s not helpful when “outsiders”
> chime in.

Your activities are (negatively) affecting whole FSF/GNU and free
software movement in general. So the comments from „outsiders“ are relevant.

Franta

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

Dear Ludovic,

Hello, how are you? I was on long travel, could not answer you earlier.

* Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> [2019-10-10 16:29]:
> Hi Jean-Louis,
> 
> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> skribis:
> 
> > * Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
> >> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
> >> lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep disrupting
> >> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
> >
> > I cannot expect anything else from you.
> 
> You’ve made your point now; I see you’ve even set up a web page to
> collect hatred messages against me.

I am sorry for your experience. I have not "setup the web page to
collect hatred messages against you". That you think that is my
purpose, that is your own opinion, but it is not.

I have set the page to show that there are people who think different
than you.

You have made your statement in public, and your statement introduces
other politics but free software politics into the GNU free software
spaces.

Guix is part of GNU project, and you are promoting your whatever other
politics. I do not know what exactly it is named, I think it is
feminism. Call it as you wish, because I am not interested in that
other politics. If I am interested I will read it.

GNU Project is not political. It is apolitical.

Did I ask you to tell me your facts to publish such opinions on GNU
Guix pages guix.gnu.org subdomain on GNU.ORG project?

Did you answer to me that it is because of abort() joke?

Here is the log proving so:
http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log

"you've probably seen a number of events, like the "glibc abort joke"
episode, the latest episode with MIT, and more"

So you are the one introducing thought-frames and you are organizing
Thougtpolice Squad and introducing other politics into GNU Project but
free software politics.

I don't care of your feminism, or contra-feminism issues. I simply
don't. I am supporting GNU project for reasons of
non-discrimination. For reasons that it is for everybody, regardless
of their opinions.

You mentioned "the recent MIT episode", but did you read the
rebuttals?

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

Is your opinion and statement going to change after reading facts and
rebuttals? Are you going to change your Guix statement due to
disagreements to your  feminism politics in Guix which is in the GNU
Project?

Could you have some balls and simply take out your feminism politics
out of GNU Project?

Was there not enough people telling you on Guix chat that for reasons
of your politics that they do not want to support Guix neither use
Guix?

Why are you imposing other directions in Guix system distribution,
others but "Freedom Zero" policies that Guix remains for everybody,
and not just for those who are on side of feminism?

> I ask you to stop using the Guix mailing lists for this now.  I will
> propose to the Guix maintainers to put you on a moderation queue if
> you don’t stop by yourself.

For as long is that statement on Guix website, and I live, I will not
stop.

For as long as you are bringing fear, uncertainty and doubt into what
was friendly GNU community of people of various opinions but agreeing
to provide GNU free software systems, I will not stop.

For as long as Guix as such and you keep pushing other politics into
GNU Project but politics of free software, I will not stop.

You can put me under your censorship, isn't that what you were doing
since the moment I tried asking you about facts?

Your own website does not speak of free software politics, it speaks
of software as such. But you never mentioned Dr. Richard Stallman or
ideals of free software on your personal website:
http://web.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludo-3.html
http://people.bordeaux.inria.fr/lcourtes/

Your speeches are technical not ideological.

And who are you then to say that Richard Stallman does not qualify as
GNU project leader? You are hacker, programmer, but ideologically,
your only stance is in feminism, even that is in covert manner.

> Disagreement is fine; attrition is now.

That you don't like people's opinion is already clear. But one thing
you cannot do nothing about is the snow ball that is going on those
political issues that you introduced in Guix, the distribution that
received over US $100,000 from FSF and third parties.

> My sincere apologies to all the Guix people who are witnessing this.
> :-(

"Guix people" are not all people, many disagree with you and they told
you on IRC chat, and on many web pages. And you know it.

Please take your political shit out of Guix pages. Or go out of GNU as
being political enough to bring separation in community because of
your political views. Make your own projects.

GNU was always apolitical.

RMS was never apolitical.

Many GNU project maintainers are NOT apolitical. If somebody is jewish
or muslim or feminist, or contra-feminist, or anti-fascist, or
fascist, or nazi, or contra-nazi, I don't care, as we are all users of
free software. That is what brings people together.

If I have my political views, I will express them elsewhere but on GNU
project. GNU Project shall remain politically free.

You do care, for you is feminism more important than free software and
bringing separation in GNU free software community is harm that you
have done and still doing.

It is time for you to either bring your system distribution into
apolitical environment where only free software is promoted and
pushed, and not where your feminism is promoted.

Or, what person with balls would do is exactl that what you said, make
your own project, but make it elsewhere, as it is now clear that your
project cannot stay "feminism free" and GNU being apolitical in that
sense, you should make your feminism-pro project for free software
elsewhere, and be free to call functions dontabort() if you wish so.

Jean Louis

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Quiliro Ordóñez]

* Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
> lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep disrupting
> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other
information, on the basis that such material is considered
objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Todor Kondić]

On Friday, 11 October 2019 01:27, Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> wrote:

> * Ricardo Wurmus rekado@elephly.net [2019-10-10 07:09]:
>
> > I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
> > lists. I am asking you a second time publicly. If you keep disrupting
> > our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
>
> Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other
> information, on the basis that such material is considered
> objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".


Great to see some fire on otherwise pretty toned down lists, HOWEVER, if we could keep it to just one list (help-guix@gnu.org being the least INappropriate) that would be great.

My few eurocents: keep calm, submit code (yeah, me too, Mr Remorker!), defend core values of GNU. The rest is unavoidable appendage of changing times, minds, (mis)understandings and herd mentality.

GNU Guix is an awesome project. However I personally feel about the RMS maelstrom, I want to see GNU Guix grow and wish all the best to its maintainers (oh, and lets not forget about GNU Guile).

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Quiliro,

Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> skribis:

> * Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
>> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
>> lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep disrupting
>> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
>
> Censorship [...]

There is no censorship.

By joining Guix, one agrees to follow the rules at
<https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT>.
These are simple rules to keep this space welcoming.  We all benefit
from their application.

Again, expressing disagreement is fine; harassing people like Jean Louis
has been doing (first on IRC, then on this mailing list and via their
web site) is not.

My initial message in this thread was directed at Guix developers.
Evidently we’ve now got quite a lot of feedback from people not involved
in Guix.  Yet, this remains a mailing list intended for Guix development.

So, to everyone who wants to discuss GNU matters further, please let’s
use gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org.

Thanks!

Ludo’.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[quiliro]

On Fri, October 11, 2019 3:03 am, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Quiliro,
>
> Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> skribis:
>
>> * Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
>>> I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
>>> lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep disrupting
>>> our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
>>
>> Censorship [...]
>
> There is no censorship.
>
> By joining Guix, one agrees to follow the rules at
> <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT>.
> These are simple rules to keep this space welcoming.  We all benefit
> from their application.

So by agreeing to censorship that means there is no censorship?

> Again, expressing disagreement is fine; harassing people like Jean Louis
> has been doing (first on IRC, then on this mailing list and via their
> web site) is not.

So your rules have to apply to him, but his rules do not apply to you just
because he entered this list? To be bound by somebody else's rules does
not imply you are free. It just implies you were forced to comply. That is
not freedom. It is voluntary enslavement.

> My initial message in this thread was directed at Guix developers.
> Evidently we’ve now got quite a lot of feedback from people not involved
> in Guix.  Yet, this remains a mailing list intended for Guix development.

Correct. I have moved it to a list with more interested parties: help-guix.

> So, to everyone who wants to discuss GNU matters further, please let’s
> use gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org.

This is a matter for Guix because this is the place where censorship is
occurring.

There is no censorship that I have seen on GNU, just your attempt to take
over control of the project Stallman has started and fueled for years just
because of your personal grudge with him. You chose to take the problems
as the most important and ignore his contributions, past and present. I
myself was introduced to Guix by Richard and I have involved others. Heck!
I would say even you came to GNU because of Richard. That is very recent
history. It is not 40 years old.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> [2019-10-11 01:27]:
> * Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
> > I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
> > lists.  I am asking you a second time publicly.  If you keep disrupting
> > our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
> 
> Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other
> information, on the basis that such material is considered
> objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient.

Their censorship is for their very expressed support to feminism
movement. They are introducing politics into GNU project.

GNU project is apolitical to anything but free software.

They have broken their own deeds to be apolitical, and are abusing
GNU.org domain and Guix free system distribution to spread their
feminist views.

Reasons have been given to me by Ludovic Courtès, where he said it is
abort() joke and Emacs Virgin joke, see:
http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log and
http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-08.log

By the way Ludovic Courtès does not have any promotion of free
software politics on his website, so he never even mentioned the four
freedoms, he is not really proponent, he is programmer, but that is
not same. He is rather opportunist pushing himself and his own goals
forward. One cannot expect more but what he does now.

Jean Louis

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Pierre-Henry F.]

Dear Jean-Louis,

Could you please stop sending messages to the channel?

Thanks,
PHF

Envoyé depuis ProtonMail mobile

-------- Message d'origine --------
On 12 oct. 2019 à 14:19, Jean Louis a écrit :

> * Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> [2019-10-11 01:27]:
>> * Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> [2019-10-10 07:09]:
>> > I have previously asked you privately to stop spamming our mailing
>> > lists. I am asking you a second time publicly. If you keep disrupting
>> > our mailing lists your posts will be moderated.
>>
>> Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other
>> information, on the basis that such material is considered
>> objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient.
>
> Their censorship is for their very expressed support to feminism
> movement. They are introducing politics into GNU project.
>
> GNU project is apolitical to anything but free software.
>
> They have broken their own deeds to be apolitical, and are abusing
> GNU.org domain and Guix free system distribution to spread their
> feminist views.
>
> Reasons have been given to me by Ludovic Courtès, where he said it is
> abort() joke and Emacs Virgin joke, see:
> http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log and
> http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-08.log
>
> By the way Ludovic Courtès does not have any promotion of free
> software politics on his website, so he never even mentioned the four
> freedoms, he is not really proponent, he is programmer, but that is
> not same. He is rather opportunist pushing himself and his own goals
> forward. One cannot expect more but what he does now.
>
> Jean Louis

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> [2019-10-08 04:34]:
> Hi Jesse,
> 
> Jesse Gibbons <jgibbons2357@gmail.com> skribis:
> 
> > Is there an alternative list where we can have an in-depth discussion?
> 
> Unfortunately GNU maintainers have having this discussion on private
> mailing lists.

Please do not speak of "GNU maintainers" mention people by their
name. If you think those on the statement, say "small group of GNU
maintainers who signed the statement".

> However, I suppose you could raise it for example on
> <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/admindb/gnu-misc-discuss>.

You published it on GUIX project, on GNU.ORG website, it is proper to
answer to GUIX.

Ludo, please step down from GNU project for the sake of your own
character and integrity. You are damaging the community. Do for GUIX
what RMS did for FSF. Have balls.

Obviously, there are people who don't trust you. Did you say "The GNU
Project we want to build is one that everyone can trust to defend
their freedom." -- so Ludovick, just do it, take yourself out of GNU
project, and build other project, don't think you can get over this
GNU project, make your own. You are smart guy.

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Hartmut Goebel]

Am 10.10.19 um 05:57 schrieb Jean Louis:
> Ludo, please step down from GNU project […]
>
> Obviously, there are people who don't trust you.


No reasons for any of the signers to step back. There are always some
guys who don't trust others.*)

Beside this I wonder what is you legitimization of demanding Ludo to
step back?! I' can' remember your being part of GNU Guix, are you?


*) Side note: This is like Fascists all over here in Europe argue: They
demand to be "the people", but they are a minority. It's just that they
are loud and aggressive. Not saying your are a Fascist, though, but the
pattern is the same.

-- 
Regards
Hartmut Goebel

| Hartmut Goebel          | h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com               |
| www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com> [2019-10-10 10:43]:
> Am 10.10.19 um 05:57 schrieb Jean Louis:
> > Ludo, please step down from GNU project […]
> >
> > Obviously, there are people who don't trust you.
> 
> No reasons for any of the signers to step back. There are always some
> guys who don't trust others.*)

That is for me lack of integrity. If I come to your house, I will
never expel you, I must be respectful.

It is lack of respect. They like donations and support from RMS and
now they wish to take over GNU project and that "all people trust
them".

Hundreds of RMS supportie comments in last days clearly tell that
Ludovick and company will never have "trust of all people", in fact
they will never have trust from majority.

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering Dr. Richard Stallman
to step down and resign, to do their software hacking somewhere else,
as they do not deserve funding that RMS is giving them. Ludovic
Courtès, Ricardo Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault,
Carlos O'Donell, Andy Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard,
Ian Lance Taylor, Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber,
Jan Nieuwenhuizen, John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen
Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej
Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John W. Eaton, please RESIGN and step down
from GNU projects, disassociate yourself or find another house for
your excessive and uncontrollable fear of the free speech. Do not
spread fear, uncertainty and doubt on GNU.ORG project pages.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Ludovic-Court%C3%A8s-Guix-is-accusing-Stallman-of-Thoughtcrime-on-his-own-domain-GNU-org.html
https://fsforce.noblogs.org/
https://backtotheaugust.org/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UbQ1kc1vQU or https://watchkin.com/y/7UbQ1kc1vQU

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Dimakakos Dimos]

Ludovic Courtès writes:

> We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> Project, are publishing this statement today:
>
>   https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/

Hello to everyone. First of all I think that Guix blog was certainly not
the proper place for such an announcement. I agree that software,
especially free is a political issue and statement. On the other hand,
there shall be a separation since many people are involved in Guix and
may not be at the same page ideologically with the project's maintainers
and so could be alienated.

On the subject, I think that the discussion of rms's position in GNU is
valid but that at the same time such an announcment should be made after
a careful consideration and research. Do we have evidence that rms has
caused harm to GNU's projects? Even in the aspect of diversity and
community building, do we have evidence that rms is block or is it that
we just play along with a media campaign, that was in a fact a full on
personality attack on rms, by going as far as misquoting him.

I would like to hear you expand on ways that the empowerment of all
computer users was undermined by rms. I write all these in good
faith. On one hand I can accept that if there is concrete evidence, on
the other hand I see in the web media, people, associated with companies
that would like the software freedom fronts to collapse, bash and drive
out a person that offered his life to create and support the movement.

In my opinion the timing is a bit off. By trying to solve whatever issue
the community has with rms at this particular point, is like validating
the misinformation that has spread this last month about his name. It's
like the whole character assasination that happens on web is valid so we
need to cancel rms. I think this is totally unfair. At the same time
it's also important to move our community forward in ways that include
every person and also enable people of all kinds of background to take
part in GNU and this way realize the software freedom ideals.

So to sum up it would be nice to expand a bit on the announcement. My
main questions are:

     1. How does the GNU project operate, in the light of all the
     different projects, and what role and influence had rms as the head
     of GNU?

     2. How does rms with his afformentioned role undermine diversity
     and inclusivity of people working in GNU projects?

     3. What would be your suggestion on the next day of GNU when rms
     hypothetically steps down? Is he a single issue or are the other
     issues that our community shall overcome.

     4. In the case that rms is actually harming to our community how do
     we protect free software ideals while removing a person so closely
     related to their creation?

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 4:38 PM, Dimakakos Dimos <bendersteed@gmail.com> wrote:

> Do we have evidence that rms has caused harm to GNU's projects?

in short: yes.

lots of people have talked about this, but here is one thread I've seen recently: https://pleroma.site/notice/9nh9bWH6RbrQinMp1M

Anyways, this is not the proper forum for discussing this.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Dimakakos Dimos]

P writes:

>> Do we have evidence that rms has caused harm to GNU's projects?
>
> in short: yes.
>
> lots of people have talked about this, but here is one thread I've seen recently: https://pleroma.site/notice/9nh9bWH6RbrQinMp1M

Thanks, very interesting thread. And I agree this is not the appropriate
list for this discussion, I replied trying to understand more of the
situation and people's feeling on the matter. 

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* P <pronaip@protonmail.com> [2019-10-08 13:30]:
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 4:38 PM, Dimakakos Dimos <bendersteed@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Do we have evidence that rms has caused harm to GNU's projects?
> 
> in short: yes.
> 
> lots of people have talked about this, but here is one thread I've seen recently: https://pleroma.site/notice/9nh9bWH6RbrQinMp1M
> 
> Anyways, this is not the proper forum for discussing this.

I have visited that page, and there is no fact there to confirm their
defaming, harassing, generalization "that Stallman’s behavior over the
years has undermined a core value of the GNU project: the empowerment
of all computer users. GNU is not fulfilling its mission when the
behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to
reach out to." -- ABSOLUTELY NOT.

I cannot trust you to be able to distinguish what is fact and what is
not. When somebody says something it does not automatically becomes a
fact, and there was no mentioning of any harming of GNU core
values...

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[zimoun]

Hi,

First, just to give numbers about what means 18 GNU maintainers. Here
[1] is the list of the GNU packages. I let you count but I guess the
list is more than 300 packages. Therefore, one can guess that the GNU
maintainers are more than 300.
Well, even if these 18 people are awesome, there are 18 compared to
more than 300. Therefore, now this statement is just a call.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/manual/blurbs.html


Second, we can complain about the wording of the statement, the
publishing way, asking for concrete facts, etc. but this statement is
not a surprise. Is it? Really?
It would have perhaps been better received if the 18 signatories did
as Thomas Bushnell [2]: speaking individually about their own
experience [3] of long time contributor. But does it change their key
point: "We believe that Richard Stallman cannot represent all of
GNU."?

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Bushnell
[3] https://medium.com/@thomas.bushnell/a-reflection-on-the-departure-of-rms-18e6a835fd84


To conclude, this statement will not change as we interact here on
Guix and how we are trying to be welcoming. And instead of spending
our resource on I-am-not-sure-what, let congrats everyone for the
core-updates merge of today! and let be happy about the last blog
talking about bootstrapping and say big thank you to Janneke (and the
bootstrappable team) for their amazing work on this. Please. It
appears to me more important than what I perceive as "splitting
hairs".


All the best,
simon

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> [2019-10-08 16:19]:
> Hi,
> 
> First, just to give numbers about what means 18 GNU maintainers. Here
> [1] is the list of the GNU packages. I let you count but I guess the
> list is more than 300 packages. Therefore, one can guess that the GNU
> maintainers are more than 300.
> Well, even if these 18 people are awesome, there are 18 compared to
> more than 300. Therefore, now this statement is just a call.
> 
> [1] https://www.gnu.org/manual/blurbs.html

GNU project can still fork the software and use any free software and
continue without problems.

> Second, we can complain about the wording of the statement, the
> publishing way, asking for concrete facts, etc. but this statement is
> not a surprise. Is it? Really?

To me it is a big X$%*&#X surprise because it is published with money
that RMS provided for them to publish it, on RMS's domain, to defame
and harass RMS.

I have nothing against free speech, I am against abusing GNU project
on the GNU project resources.

In fact, they shall step down and remove themselves from GNU and build
whatever project they wish to build.

That is a hostile take over attempt with authority, power and funds as
purpose.

> It would have perhaps been better received if the 18 signatories did
> as Thomas Bushnell [2]: speaking individually about their own
> experience [3] of long time contributor. But does it change their key
> point: "We believe that Richard Stallman cannot represent all of
> GNU."?

Exactly, I have absolutely nothing to say against publishing their
opinions on their own websites.

That is exactly what RMS is doing, he publishes his opinions on
https://www.stallman.org

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Andy Wingo]

On Tue 08 Oct 2019 18:38, Dimakakos Dimos <bendersteed@gmail.com> writes:

> So to sum up it would be nice to expand a bit on the announcement. My
> main questions are:
>
>      1. How does the GNU project operate, in the light of all the
>      different projects, and what role and influence had rms as the head
>      of GNU?
>
>      2. How does rms with his afformentioned role undermine diversity
>      and inclusivity of people working in GNU projects?
>
>      3. What would be your suggestion on the next day of GNU when rms
>      hypothetically steps down? Is he a single issue or are the other
>      issues that our community shall overcome.
>
>      4. In the case that rms is actually harming to our community how do
>      we protect free software ideals while removing a person so closely
>      related to their creation?

For what it is worth, I have some personal answers to some of these
questions here:

  https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu

Regards,

Andy

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Andy Wingo <wingo@igalia.com> [2019-10-09 11:49]:
> For what it is worth, I have some personal answers to some of these
> questions here:
> 
>   https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu

I am appreciating that you are publishing your opinions beyond the
GUIX.GNU.ORG and GNU.ORG domains. That is how it shall be done.

> For many years now, I have not considered Richard Stallman (RMS) to
> be the head of the GNU project. Yes, he created GNU, speaking it
> into existence via prophetic narrative and via code; yes, he
> inspired many people, myself included, to make the vision of a GNU
> system into a reality; and yes, he should be recognized for these
> things. But accomplishing difficult and important tasks for GNU in
> the past does not grant RMS perpetual sovereignty over GNU in the
> future.

All of his works in past do grant him all of the rights to continue
with it as he wish. And for the case that he is not any more around,
he has formed the FSF. Everything clear.

> More on the motivations for the non serviam in a minute. But first,
> a meta-point: the GNU project does not exist, at least not in the
> sense that many people think it does. It is not a legal entity. It
> is not a charity. You cannot give money to the GNU project. Besides
> the manifesto, GNU has no by-laws or constitution or founding
> document.

It does exist, and it need not exist in your own legal framework, and
there is something known as freedom of associations, so GNU project
never had to exist as registered entity. FSF came somewhat later.

That does not invalidate GNU project. I am not sure from which country
you are, but if you are saying that "project" or "organization" need
to be legally registered then maybe you come from some limited or
under developed country with fascist restrictions.

Even if some project is not registered, one can give money to it, I
don't know which jurisdiction you are speaking about. If one wish to
remain tax-free on donations, one can register a non-profit in the
USA but simple registration does not make it tax-free, one has to
prove the tax-free status by doing application to the IRS.

But that anybody in the world can receive donations that is a fact,
and you cannot dispute it, you can tell it from your view point, but
man I guess you are lacking some legal information.

> One could describe GNU as a set of software packages that have been
> designated by RMS as forming part, in some way, of GNU. But this
> artifact-centered description does not capture movement: software
> does not, by itself, change the world; it lacks agency. It is the
> people that maintain, grow, adapt, and build the software that are
> the heart of the GNU project -- the maintainers of and contributors
> to the GNU packages. They are the GNU of whom I speak and of whom I
> form a part.

It is good if you express yourself as "GNU software supporters,
programmers", something like that. Don't use GNU ot say "people", it
is not quite adequate, try to express yourself as specifics as
possible to avoid generalization.

> Richard Stallman describes himself as the leader of the GNU project
> -- the "chief GNUisance", he calls it -- but this position only
> exists in any real sense by consent of the people that make GNU. So
> what is he doing with this role? Does he deserve it? Should we
> consent?

He is policy maker, chief planner. Without him, you would not have the
GPL, copyleft, free software freedoms, books and articles, speeches on
free software.

You maybe consider leader only if leader does what you think it is
right to do. That is not how leadership works.

> To me it has been clear for many years that to a first
> approximation, the answer is that RMS does nothing for GNU.

Then you are totally misinformed. If you think it is so, why not
simply resign?

> RMS does not write software. He does not design software, or
> systems. He does hold a role of accepting new projects into GNU;
> there, his primary criteria is not "does this make a better GNU
> system"; it is, rather, "does the new project meet the minimum
> requirements".

That is lie, nonsense. Everybody is free to decide when to write
software or to organize the community to write it. You lack basic
senses of observation. GNU, FSF, and majority of free software,
including Linux kernel are free because it was incentive and original
creation of Richard Stallman. Linus would never make it free, he said
so, and he did not publish it as free. Many software pieces became
free because of Richard Stallman.

If you cannot see his work, I would ask you to find other community to
spread misinformation.

> By itself, this seems to me to be a failure of leadership for a
> software project like GNU.

Absolutely not, but if you have serious disagreements, how about
organizing your own project and forwarding free software?

To cut the story short, none of your opinions are the fact that prove
"that Stallman’s behavior over the years has undermined a core value
of the GNU project: the empowerment of all computer users. GNU is not
fulfilling its mission when the behavior of its leader alienates a
large part of those we want to reach out to."

Do you have anything better?

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Arun Isaac]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 438 bytes --]


> For what it is worth, I have some personal answers to some of these
> questions here:
>
>   https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu

I largely agree with the thoughts you have expressed in this blog
post. I think the original joint statement on the Guix blog should
articulate these ideas in a similar way. The way the statement stands
right now, it is too vague and open to misinterpretation.

Regards,
Arun.

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

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Svante Signell]

On Fri, 2019-10-11 at 03:11 +0530, Arun Isaac wrote:
> > For what it is worth, I have some personal answers to some of these
> > questions here:
> > 
> >   https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu
> 
> I largely agree with the thoughts you have expressed in this blog
> post. I think the original joint statement on the Guix blog should
> articulate these ideas in a similar way. The way the statement stands
> right now, it is too vague and open to misinterpretation.

I've also read Andy Wingos blog, and he has some very good points
there. Nevertheless, the statement on the GNU project should not have
been published on the guix-devel mailing list, rather gnu-system-
discuss. And the timing is very bad, in the light of RMS being hunted
by social media non-journalists, causing him to FSF and MIT, it is
extremely harmful for Free Software Development in general. Please,
moderate yourselves (all of you), please!
 

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

Dne 09. 10. 19 v 10:56 Andy Wingo napsal(a):
> https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu
>
> the best thing that he could do for GNU is to stop pretending to run 
> things, to instead declare victory and retire to an emeritus role.

Of course, one day he will have to retire and have to pass on his
follower, who should continue on that uncompromising journey.

But today is a wrong day for such step and asking him to do it now is a
very bad thing which undermines free software movement. Today he needs
our support, regardless your opinions on his leadership or other various
topics. If he would have done it two months ago, it would be OK. If he
would do it year or two later, it would be OK. But not now.

FSF (and thus also GNU) was under massive attack from the outside. Lot
of nasty things happened during past weeks, lot of lies and really bad
journalism (or rather „journalism“), disgusting comments on Twitter and
other social networks. It is a pure Evil and we must not retreat. FSF
must prove that it is an independent and sovereign organization and
reject such attacks and reject such requests and threats. Only this way
it can preserve its moral credit and stay trustworthy organization.

Franta

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Dimakakos Dimos <bendersteed@gmail.com> [2019-10-08 12:38]:
> On the subject, I think that the discussion of rms's position in GNU is
> valid but that at the same time such an announcment should be made after
> a careful consideration and research.

There was no public discussion. I am not against their opinion, and
any discussion, I don't mind for hackers, guix, script kiddies, or
wannabes to discuss anything, I don't mind for millions of rumor
mongers in this world.

What I do mind is that they are using funds of the FSF to defame and
harass RMS. The one who gave them GUIX.GNU.ORG website and domain, web
space, and one who has created GNU Project.

> Do we have evidence that rms has caused harm to GNU's projects?

There is no evidence.

He is entitled to his opinion.

For any project in the world, Mother Theresa even, there will be
thoughtless people who are complaining for something.

You can pour cash onto people, you will find people
complaining. Always. It is social phenomena.

> Even in the aspect of diversity and community building, do we have
> evidence that rms is block or is it that we just play along with a
> media campaign, that was in a fact a full on personality attack on
> rms, by going as far as misquoting him.

Facts (even if you know them):
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

> I would like to hear you expand on ways that the empowerment of all
> computer users was undermined by rms. I write all these in good
> faith. On one hand I can accept that if there is concrete evidence,
> on the other hand I see in the web media, people, associated with
> companies that would like the software freedom fronts to collapse,
> bash and drive out a person that offered his life to create and
> support the movement.

I have tried asking Ludovick Courtès to tell me facts. I was genuinely
interested, he has no facts. He is basing that opinion on rumour,
there is no fact that RMS ever hurt "core values of GNU project over
years" that is nonsense.

Everybody is entitled to opinion and so is RMS.

When that Media article came out, instead to show some loyalty and
research the statements, which one could easily find not to be true,
they started bashing on RMS.

> In my opinion the timing is a bit off. By trying to solve whatever issue
> the community has with rms at this particular point,

Let us not generalize, "community" is generalization. Ludovick Courtès
did not allow comments on his page, but there are comments on that on
various other pages, there are hundreds contrary comments already, and
just 2-3 people are joining their "statement" in the sense. Obviously
that is "small group within larger group of GNU maintainers".

It is not community that has a problem. It is them, right now 24, and
I would like to see their integrity to fork the GNU project elsewhere
and call it their own name, as GNU is a trademark.

> is like validating the misinformation that has spread this last
> month about his name. It's like the whole character assasination
> that happens on web is valid so we need to cancel rms. I think this
> is totally unfair. At the same time it's also important to move our
> community forward in ways that include every person and also enable
> people of all kinds of background to take part in GNU and this way
> realize the software freedom ideals.

It is more than unfair, it also shows that RMS has not enacted enough
enforcing of policies. He is probably waiting for people to speak out,
because he is waaaay to kind for this mob.

>      2. How does rms with his afformentioned role undermine diversity
>      and inclusivity of people working in GNU projects?

I hope to see the facts, but now I know they have none.

Jean

I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Pierre Neidhardt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 241 bytes --]

On a side note: why is the list of maintainers numbered?  Is there a
hierarchy?  If not, maybe the list should be itemized instead and sorted
alphabetically (or whatever order makes sense).

-- 
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/

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

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Tobias Geerinckx-Rice]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 528 bytes --]

Pierre Neidhardt 写道：
> On a side note: why is the list of maintainers numbered?  Is 
> there a
> hierarchy?  If not, maybe the list should be itemized instead 
> and sorted
> alphabetically (or whatever order makes sense).

AFAIK it is simply in the order in which the signatories signed 
the thing.  That's certainly the case for numbers 19 and up.  It 
makes it trivial to count the number of signatures (even though 
it's forever stuck at ‘18’ in all third-party reporting :-).

Kind regards,

T G-R

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Pierre Neidhardt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 470 bytes --]

Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr> writes:

> AFAIK it is simply in the order in which the signatories signed 
> the thing.  That's certainly the case for numbers 19 and up.  It 
> makes it trivial to count the number of signatures (even though 
> it's forever stuck at ‘18’ in all third-party reporting :-).

I think it'd be nice to explain this in the post then, lest it comes
across as something else :)

-- 
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/

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

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Tobias Geerinckx-Rice]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 863 bytes --]

Pierre Neidhardt 写道：
> Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr> writes:
>
>> AFAIK it is simply in the order in which the signatories signed 
>> the thing.  That's certainly the case for numbers 19 and up. 
>> It 
>> makes it trivial to count the number of signatures (even though 
>> it's forever stuck at ‘18’ in all third-party reporting :-).
>
> I think it'd be nice to explain this in the post then, lest it 
> comes
> across as something else :)

Eh.  Mmmmmaybe (I'll let Ludo' answer that :-).

It never occurred to me that it even could be anything else, let 
alone some hierarchy, and I didn't have an OMG-yes moment when you 
suggested that interpretation.  Quite the contrary; hierarchies 
(of humans or projects) aren't linear things or formatted as 
numbered lists.

God, writing for the entire Internet is hard,

T G-R

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Mikhail Kryshen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1622 bytes --]

I'm deeply disappointed to see this.  I always thought that the free
software community have strong and independent culture, and it's very
sad to see GNU maintainers, for whose work I have great respect, fall
for the moral panic that is being spread by news and social media (it is
in the interests of the media to promote moral panics as it increases
user engagement and gives them even more power to manipulate the
public).  This leads to dissolution of the free software culture and its
ethical values with the influence of media and corporations that are
hostile towards software freedom.  And you demonstrated that this
influence is real by letting a slanderous media campaign provoke you
into action (even if you are not acting merely upon the false
accusations by the media and have some valid reasons for doing this, you
are still acting in the wake of that campaign and under the influence of
it).

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Hello Guix!
>
> We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> Project, are publishing this statement today:
>
>   https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
>
> We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
> but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.  (Ricardo and
> I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
> on-board.)
>
> This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
> but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
> questions you may have.  :-)
>
> Ludo’.

-- 
Mikhail

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 658 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Mikhail,

Mikhail Kryshen <mikhail@kryshen.net> skribis:

> I'm deeply disappointed to see this.  I always thought that the free
> software community have strong and independent culture, and it's very
> sad to see GNU maintainers, for whose work I have great respect, fall
> for the moral panic that is being spread by news and social media

[...]

> This leads to dissolution of the free software culture and its
> ethical values with the influence of media and corporations that are
> hostile towards software freedom.

I respectfully think that your interpretation is incorrect.

Keep in mind that each of the signatories has typically more than 10
years of experience as developer or maintainer of GNU (more than that
for some.)  They have dedicated a large part of their life to that, and
they have worked a lot with GNU and RMS.  So it really isn’t about what
“the media” said last week or the week before.

Perhaps you find our decision hard to understand, or perhaps you
disagree with it, but remember that we have a different perspective.

RMS created GNU, but GNU has long expanded beyond RMS, and free software
has expanded way beyond GNU, too.  We must keep it striving and reach
out to those who’ve not yet joined us to share the software!

Ludo’.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Catallaxy]

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

> So it really isn’t about what
> “the media” said last week or the week before.

If this is the case then the timing of this move is really very unfortunate. If this is a decision many years in the making then it seems hard to imagine a worse time to publicly act on it than in the midst of the shockingly unfair media pile-on that RMS has been subjected to recently. Anyone looking from outside is of course going to conclude that this action is directly related to the recent and widely publicized public lynching of RMS and not a reaction to other past issues that have not been publicly discussed or disclosed.

> We must keep it striving and reach
> out to those who’ve not yet joined us to share the software!

If it somehow was not clear to you before that this action would drive some people away (including people who already are firmly aligned with the true values of the free software movement) then it should be apparent now. The only reason I'm commenting is to add a voice to emphasize this in the hope that if you failed to realize you would alienate people (which seems to be the opposite of your stated aim) that you will realize it now and reconsider your approach.

Freedom has many powerful enemies and I can't have confidence in GNU's ability to stand up to enemies like nation states and global corporations if it is led by people who can't even stand up to a rabid twitter mob and a bunch of agenda driven journalists spreading lies and misrepresentations.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Mikhail Kryshen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2783 bytes --]

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi Mikhail,
>
> Mikhail Kryshen <mikhail@kryshen.net> skribis:
>
>> I'm deeply disappointed to see this.  I always thought that the free
>> software community have strong and independent culture, and it's very
>> sad to see GNU maintainers, for whose work I have great respect, fall
>> for the moral panic that is being spread by news and social media
>
> [...]
>
>> This leads to dissolution of the free software culture and its
>> ethical values with the influence of media and corporations that are
>> hostile towards software freedom.
>
> I respectfully think that your interpretation is incorrect.
>
> Keep in mind that each of the signatories has typically more than 10
> years of experience as developer or maintainer of GNU (more than that
> for some.)  They have dedicated a large part of their life to that, and
> they have worked a lot with GNU and RMS.  So it really isn’t about what
> “the media” said last week or the week before.

Is it true then, that you intentionally and knowingly tried to take
advantage of the dishonest media attack on RMS and of its consequences?
Otherwise, how else would you explain the timing of your action?  For
now I'd rather stick to my interpretation of you acting under moral
panic, as it is the least bad one.

> Perhaps you find our decision hard to understand, or perhaps you
> disagree with it, but remember that we have a different perspective.
>
> RMS created GNU, but GNU has long expanded beyond RMS, and free software
> has expanded way beyond GNU, too.  We must keep it striving and reach
> out to those who’ve not yet joined us to share the software!

I share your values, I too want our community to be welcoming, inclusive
and harassment-free.  The problem is not with the values you are trying
to defend, but with your methods.  First the introduction of CoC and
then publication of the statement promoted fear, tension and hatred in
the community, alienated potential users and contributors, gave further
rise to moral panics (both "SJW" and anti-SJW, as you can see in the
discussions that followed) and made us more vulnerable to hostile
manipulation, as people under any moral panic are easily weaponized
against others (this is being widely used in politics all over the
world).

For a year now I've been promoting Guix at my university, and I'm
supporting it on close to a hundred of workstations there, it's too late
to back out, but I would not have started it today and probably would
have restrained myself to only using Guix on my own computer just for
technical curiosity, because my confidence in the future of GNU and Guix
is shaken, and the community does not look welcoming any more.

--
Mikhail

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 658 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

Thank you for your understanding and the defense of RMS and that
includes GNU and FSF too.

I do not know of any evidence that somebody in FSF is doing something
wrong against the GNU or RMS, if anybody knows, please show me links.

Let me give you summary of what happened:

1. Person accused RMS of issues not related to GNU or FSF, related to
   jokes like abort() jokes, related to his statements which were
   logical and nothing bad. Even if his statements would be bad for
   majority of people, those are not related to free software
   foundation.

   See references below.
   
   My Thoughts on the Richard Stallman "Scandal" by Jacob
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE

   https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

2. Few of people in Guix project have made statement that support
   feminism politics and have published it on the GNU project pages,
   in particular on Guix: https://guix.gnu.org/

   They have tried to hide the feminism agenda on that page, but they
   have openly said it on their IRC log, see evidences on
   http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log and
   http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-08.log by searching for words
   "abort" and "virgin" jokes and "MIT".

   Basically, without public discussion, without verification of
   facts, they are abusing GNU project pages and trying to introduce
   feminism politics into GNU project.

3. People protest against it and make various comments and
   remarks.

The basis of GNU project is that it is for everybody, it shall be
apolitical, because as soon as any politics is introduced, it is
dividing the community.

We are together in community for reasons of free software philosophy
as that is planetary common goal for GNU and free software activists.

Feminism is not a planetary goal and does not fit into many countries,
and if opinion on feminism issue matters, people feel divided and not
welcome in Guix community, which is what many have already expressed
in their IRC channel. 

Feminism or introduction of any politics into the independent and
apolitical GNU project is obviously dividing the community as we are
not supposed to be identified within GNU project by our political
opinion, but by our activism to free software.

Guix leader did not allow any comments on their blog, and expressly
said they will not allow it. Ask me for IRC log for evidence if
necessary.

Thus they abuse GNU project for feminism politics, introducing other
politics for which GNU project was not meant for. 

The only politics that GNU project shall push is free software
activism.

Guix leaders find it appropriate to abuse Guix for their feministic
views, I am not agains their free speech but abusing apolitical Guix
and GNU platform for their politics is not welcome, it is dividing
community. 

We shall be friends in GNU project for reasons of having GNU as common
for everybody.

And not for reasons if we agree to feminism or not agree to feminism
or any other politics beyond GNU project, at that moment it becomes
politics beyond free software.

Finally feminism movement is not international and not common to all
people on this planet, while software and computing is common to
everybody.

Huge number of people on this planet, larger majority is not
supporting feminism, so while it is fine for me to support feminism in
the general sense of social equality of sexes, it is not fine to abuse
GNU project which is about free software and operating systems to
introduce politics that simply does not fit to everybody.

They, Ludovic Cortès and Andy Wingo and others of the Thoughtpolice
Squad[1] are on their online quest to punish Dr. Richard Stallman for
Thoughtcrime[2]. 

Sadly nobody from FSF realizes what means division of community and
nobody is acting upon it publicly that I know or can see.

That is due to fact that Guix leaders and FSF staff members did not
travel enough in this world, they did not visit many countries and did
not live in them to understand the planet and humanity better, so they
maybe are taking a stance in politics by not understanding that GNU
project is planetary project and not only for those people who agree
to feminism.

My suggestion is that you rethink about all that and decide yourself
if introduction of any other politics is good or not good for GNU and
FSF, and then to write to following email addresses with your opinion:

To FSF: fsf-and-gnu@fsf.org and to GNU: gnu-and-fsf@gnu.org and
express your opinion.

Jean Louis

P.S. How does Dr. Richard Stallman lead GNU Project? Some programmers
who never were activists of free software in the society, but just
programmers, like Ludovic, they think he shall lead project in the
same manner like they do, by programming or organizing people in
programming. That is not so.

Dr. Richard Stallman contacts opinion leaders and forwards free software:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/

He teaches the world on free software, like in August 2019 in Russia:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCh8EcBrptA

Dr. Richard Stallman provides policies and planning for GNU project, and he has done so successfuly for many years.

Footnotes:
[1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police

[2]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

What is interesting that same kind of plot happened 10 years ago when
there was issue with RMS and Microsoft/Apple and soon thereafter
followed the attack from feministic politicians to take RMS down. This
year he visited September 4th 2019 the Microsoft Research, 7 days
later there was article published on Medium to take him down for
feministic reasons.

RMS is not guilty of any crime, but thoughtcrime, he did not even say
what is said to be said and what Guix leaders are
misrepresenting. Great injustice is done to RMS by his own sheep.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Taylan Kammer]

On 07.10.2019 16:32, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
 > Hello Guix!
 >
 > We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
 > Project, are publishing this statement today:
 >
 >    https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
 >
 > We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better
 > place, but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.
 > (Ricardo and I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and
 > Marius were on-board.)
 >
 > This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in
 > detail but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer
 > any questions you may have.  :-)
 >
 > Ludo’.


Hi all,

Some drama about this leaked out of my mailing list-specific sub-folders 
(which I only skim occasionally) into my main INBOX, so of course I had 
to jump straight into it even though I'm barely around these days. ;-)


Jokes aside, I wanted to ask:

Hasn't RMS already officially stepped down?  What position does he hold 
within today's GNU project other than being a wise old person (wise with 
respect to his topics of expertise) who is respected a lot?

 From what I can tell, the GNU project is a collection of very loosely 
coupled sub-projects and the maintainers and contributors collectively 
hold a lot more power than any single person.  So in a way I guess I 
don't really see what the statement is trying to accomplish, although I 
agree with the sentiment of it.  What is the desired effect and end 
result of publishing the statement?

I'm not asking rhetorically, I think it would help the discussion a lot 
to clarify concrete goals instead of just signaling a sentiment.


A second question:

Assuming the talk about RMS's behavior includes his voicing of certain 
unpopular opinions, rather than just behavior that directly targets a 
person (like undesired advances), are we going to have a discussion 
about which opinions are considered "taboo" within the GNU project?

That is, opinions which shall not be expressed while working with other 
GNU contributors, or not expressed publicly at all by high ranking 
representatives such as maintainers of important (or any) packages?

(I'm not referring to any particular opinions voiced by RMS.  I'm asking 
generally.)

I wouldn't be *categorically* opposed to such limitations.  For instance 
I would welcome a rule that officially bans sympathizing with neo-Nazis. 
  However, I frequently see people go overboard with what they consider 
to be "hateful" ideas that ought to be taboo and banned from communities.

I've been banned from some places myself, and decided to quit some other 
places after receiving hostility.  I've seen some of the very people who 
support the banning others for being "hateful" against minorities defend 
or even openly celebrate threats or real acts of physical harm and 
vandalism against other political minorities.

(My hiatus from contributing to free software has, I would say, about 
10% to do with sensing such vibes from some community members who see 
themselves as socially progressive, though it's 90% about things related 
to me and not the community.  Still, if I find time to come back, I'd 
like to know how much self-censorship I have to apply and how much I 
have to tolerate opinions which I in turn find offensive.)


Personal suggestions re. second question follow; feel free to stop 
reading here if you don't want to get into more and more off-topic 
territory.


My personal suggestion would be to keep a very small list of explicit 
limitations, probably just the support or apologia of neo-Nazism and 
child sexual exploitation.  Voicing such opinions on any channel of the 
GNU project would be a reason to terminate someone's access to the 
channel.  Voicing them on any public channel would disqualify someone 
from maintainer and similar positions, and perhaps allow other members 
to raise a complaint against their involvement as a contributor too.

I think it's important to have such an explicitly and clearly laid out 
set of rules on what world-views get to be silenced, as otherwise you 
get repeated arguments about free speech.

All other political conflicts should IMO be decided on a case by case 
basis with the goal of reaching mutual compromise within the confines of 
the communication channels of the GNU project.  That is, 1. no favorites 
on who gets to silence who and 2. the silencing shall be limited to the 
project's communication channels.  For example let's take homosexuality 
and religion.  A gay community member could request another member to 
refrain from expressing religious views critical of homosexuality within 
the project's communication channels, as it offends her or him.  On the 
flip side, a religious person could request another member to refrain 
from expressing political views in support of normalizing homosexuality 
within society, because that in turn offends them.  Outside channels of 
communication of the project, both could express their opinions.  This 
freedom would apply even to maintainers.  This means that one might have 
to put up with the fact that the maintainer of a project privately holds 
opinions which one finds offensive.  The maintainer could voice those 
opinions on other public platforms, but not the communication channels 
of the GNU project where another member might object.  (Basically same 
rules for maintainers and contributors.)

I think it's important to keep the rules rather slim and neutral like 
this, as otherwise people get too censorship-happy and you fall into the 
problem of "who gets to decide what's offensive."


Remarks to clarify my general thoughts on these issues and where I'm 
coming from:

When "getting offended" becomes a socially accepted reason to silence 
others, it's a no-brainer that those who hold unjust social power and 
want to keep it would also start using the "getting offended" card to 
silence their opposition.  As such, "political correctness" cannot help 
political minorities in the long run; it will inevitably lead to more 
and more political opinions of minorities being labeled "politically 
incorrect," as those in positions of unjust power learn to use the 
language of the oppressed.  (I personally believe that this is already 
happening on a large scale.)

Further, the situation is never black and white.  Someone who belongs to 
one oppressed group may in turn be a member of a group oppressing yet 
another.  (Typical examples in US politics: misogynist black men and 
racist white women.)  When all groups expect total political purity from 
all their members, you inevitably get a splintering into a thousand tiny 
communities fighting each other.

     “The left is very cannibalistic. It eats its own.”

     “In the quest for inclusiveness, the left is willing to discard a 
      certain kind of complex truth. I think there’s a quickness to 
assign ill intent.”

       -- Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

I think principles of respectful open dialogue on an even playing field, 
with a few exceptions for extreme exceptions like I've mentioned, offer 
a better basis for social improvement than communities with dozens of 
rules attempting to make every single member feel validated in their 
personal world-view.

A community focused on a certain political topic can of course create 
its own rules, like for instance a women's rights group setting much 
more stringent rules on accepted speech in the group's channels, to 
prevent the wasting of time with anti-feminist trolls.

The GNU project's goal is to further software freedom, by developing 
free software.  As such, any limitations regarding accepted speech in 
its channels should IMO be limited to that topic.  I.e. ban propaganda 
for proprietary software, and keep it at that.  Any other limitations 
should only have the goal of ensuring a non-hostile working environment 
for all members, regardless of political opinions in *any* direction, 
otherwise you eventually end up in a "some are more equal than others" 
situation.


End wall of text.  Hope I'm making sense to you all.  I had to think a 
lot about political correctness and freedom of speech recently, hence 
this lengthy reply to this topic.


- Taylan

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 794 bytes --]

Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07.10.2019 16:32, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>    https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
>
> Some drama about this leaked out of my mailing list-specific sub-folders (which I only skim occasionally) into my main INBOX, so of course I had to jump straight into it even though I'm barely around these days. ;-)
>
> Jokes aside, I wanted to ask:
>
> Hasn't RMS already officially stepped down?  What position does he hold within today's GNU project other than being a wise old person (wise with respect to his topics of expertise) who is respected a lot?

Relevant mails from RMS himself are below.  (Please note, that newsgroup, as it often happens on Gmane, is misnamed, it’s GNU’s ML, not FSF’s.)


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3891 bytes --]

From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: info-gnu@gnu.org
Subject: GNU Project
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 13:20:25 -0400
Message-ID: <E1iDXRJ-00020d-NO@fencepost.gnu.org>

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

On September 16 I resigned as president of the Free Software
Foundation, but the GNU Project and the FSF are not the same.
I am still the head of the GNU Project (the Chief GNUisance),
and I intend to continue as such.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



-- 
If you have a working or partly working program that you'd like
to offer to the GNU project as a GNU package,
see https://www.gnu.org/help/evaluation.html.

[-- Attachment #1.3: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4033 bytes --]

From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: info-gnu@gnu.org
Subject: GNU-FSF relationship
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 09:54:41 -0400
Message-ID: <E1iHTTF-00047i-Qj@fencepost.gnu.org>

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

I recently resigned as president of the FSF, but the FSF continues to
provide several forms of crucial support for the GNU Project.  As head
of the GNU Project, I will be working with the FSF on how to structure
the GNU Project's relationship with the FSF in the future.

Suggestions can be sent to gnu-and-fsf@gnu.org.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



-- 
If you have a working or partly working program that you'd like
to offer to the GNU project as a GNU package,
see https://www.gnu.org/help/evaluation.html.

[-- Attachment #1.4: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3861 bytes --]

From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: info-gnu@gnu.org
Subject: No radical changes in GNU Project
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:48:23 -0400
Message-ID: <E1iHwP9-00012T-1p@fencepost.gnu.org>

As Chief GNUisance, I'd like to reassure the community
that there won't be any radical changes in the GNU Project's
goals, principles and policies.

I would like to make incremental changes in how some decisions are
made, because I won't be here forever and we need to ready others to
make GNU Project decisions when I can no longer do so.  But these
won't lead to unbounded or radical changes.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



-- 
If you have a working or partly working program that you'd like
to offer to the GNU project as a GNU package,
see https://www.gnu.org/help/evaluation.html.

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

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Christophe Poncy]

On 2019-10-11 20:41, Taylan Kammer wrote:
> […]  What position does he
> hold within today's GNU project other than being a wise old person
> (wise with respect to his topics of expertise) who is respected a lot?
> 

As a simple user, I see him as the guardian of the temple ("Chief 
GNUisance"), and that reassures me because he embodies the free software 
philosophy on its own.

> the maintainers and contributors collectively
> hold a lot more power than any single person.

IMO, the GNU essence is more powerful than the sum of its hackers.

> So in a way I guess I  don't really see what the statement
> is trying to accomplish

It visibly sets the scapegoat mechanism in motion, see 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoating#Scapegoat_mechanism

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Christophe Poncy <christophe@poncy.fr> [2019-10-11 23:10]:
> On 2019-10-11 20:41, Taylan Kammer wrote:
> > […]  What position does he
> > hold within today's GNU project other than being a wise old person
> > (wise with respect to his topics of expertise) who is respected a lot?
> > 
> 
> As a simple user, I see him as the guardian of the temple ("Chief
> GNUisance"), and that reassures me because he embodies the free software
> philosophy on its own.
> 
> > the maintainers and contributors collectively
> > hold a lot more power than any single person.
> 
> IMO, the GNU essence is more powerful than the sum of its hackers.
> 
> > So in a way I guess I  don't really see what the statement
> > is trying to accomplish
> 
> It visibly sets the scapegoat mechanism in motion, see
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoating#Scapegoat_mechanism

Thanks. Good for my reference for further propaganda.

Literary critic and philosopher Kenneth Burke first coined and described the expression scapegoat mechanism in his books Permanence and Change (1935),[14] and A Grammar of Motives (1945).[15] These works influenced some philosophical anthropologists, such as Ernest Becker and René Girard. Girard developed the concept much more extensively as an interpretation of human culture. In Girard's view, it is humankind, not God, who has need for various forms of atoning violence. Humans are driven by desire for that which another has or wants (mimetic desire). This causes a triangulation of desire and results in conflict between the desiring parties. This mimetic contagion increases to a point where society is at risk; it is at this point that the scapegoat mechanism[16] is triggered. This is the point where one person is singled out as the cause of the trouble and is expelled or killed by the group. This person is the scapegoat. Social order is restored as people are contented that they have solved the cause of their problems by removing the scapegoated individual, and the cycle begins again. The keyword here is "content". Scapegoating serves as a psychological relief for a group of people. Girard contends that this is what happened in the narrative of Jesus of Nazareth, the central figure in Christianity. The difference between the scapegoating of Jesus and others, Girard believes, is that in the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, he is shown to be an innocent victim; humanity is thus made aware of its violent tendencies and the cycle is broken. Thus Girard's work is significant as a reconstruction of the Christus Victor atonement theory. 

Important is free software philosophy and as such it is not political.

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jelle Licht]

Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com> writes:

> [snip]
>
> All other political conflicts should IMO be decided on a case by case 
> basis with the goal of reaching mutual compromise within the confines of 
> the communication channels of the GNU project.  That is, 1. no favorites 
> on who gets to silence who and 2. the silencing shall be limited to the 
> project's communication channels.  For example let's take homosexuality 
> and religion.  A gay community member could request another member to 
> refrain from expressing religious views critical of homosexuality within 
> the project's communication channels, as it offends her or him.  On the 
> flip side, a religious person could request another member to refrain 
> from expressing political views in support of normalizing homosexuality 
> within society, because that in turn offends them.  

The difference being that in this example, the bigotry can have
disastrous effects on the safety of the individuals in question, sadly
still in many places in the world.

This is in no shape or way comparable to simply "being offended". To
equate it to a simple difference of opinion does a great injustice to
those who struggle, and have struggled in the past for the right to
simply exist as they are.

I understand this is simply an example, and will give you the benefit of
the doubt that you only meant to illustrate different perspectives on
the interactions that can exist between individuals. I respectfully
disagree with it being a good example though :-)

- Jelle

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Taylan Kammer]

On 12.10.2019 01:04, Jelle Licht wrote:
> Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> [snip]
>>
>> All other political conflicts should IMO be decided on a case by case
>> basis with the goal of reaching mutual compromise within the confines of
>> the communication channels of the GNU project.  That is, 1. no favorites
>> on who gets to silence who and 2. the silencing shall be limited to the
>> project's communication channels.  For example let's take homosexuality
>> and religion.  A gay community member could request another member to
>> refrain from expressing religious views critical of homosexuality within
>> the project's communication channels, as it offends her or him.  On the
>> flip side, a religious person could request another member to refrain
>> from expressing political views in support of normalizing homosexuality
>> within society, because that in turn offends them.
> 
> The difference being that in this example, the bigotry can have
> disastrous effects on the safety of the individuals in question, sadly
> still in many places in the world.
> 
> This is in no shape or way comparable to simply "being offended". To
> equate it to a simple difference of opinion does a great injustice to
> those who struggle, and have struggled in the past for the right to
> simply exist as they are.
> 
> I understand this is simply an example, and will give you the benefit of
> the doubt that you only meant to illustrate different perspectives on
> the interactions that can exist between individuals. I respectfully
> disagree with it being a good example though :-)

Going by this logic, we could ban support of communism based on things
done by the Soviet or things currently done by the People's Republic of
China or North Korea.

There are many religious people who think homosexuality is "wrong" but
strongly disagree with violence, and rather feel "worried for" gay
people who they also try to treat with love.  I think they are very
wrong about homosexuality, but I find it commendable that they don't
tolerate violence, and could not in good conscience call them evil and
request them to be silenced.  In fact, I would not enjoy contributing to
a community that does so.

IMO the tabooing of world views based on harms they may cause, or harms
they do cause in various parts of the world, is a slippery slope.
Almost every ideology has peaceful moderates and militant extremists.

The GNU project should publish a list of ideologies that are officially
banned from its channels so people know what they're in for.  All other
topics should be treated neutrally so long as nobody is using slurs or a
bullying attitude.  Codes of conduct should clarify whether a rule such
as "no homophobia" simply means no homophobic slurs/bullying, or whether
it means that certain ideologies are banned and others favored.


(I've been using religion and homophobia as an arbitrary example.
Should anyone feel upset by this choice of example, please tell me in
private or otherwise so I can switch to another example.  Although I
don't wish to write much more on this off-topic topic...)


- Taylan

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

Can everyone move this discussion elsewhere? Seeing that this is not
related to the GNU system or Guix.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 742 bytes --]

ams@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) wrote:
Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The GNU project should publish a list of ideologies that are officially banned from its channels so people know what they're in for.  All other topics should be treated neutrally so long as nobody is using slurs or a bullying attitude.  Codes of conduct should clarify whether a rule such as "no homophobia" simply means no homophobic slurs/bullying, or whether it means that certain ideologies are banned and others favored.
>
> Can everyone move this discussion elsewhere?

Where?

> Seeing that this is not related to the GNU system or Guix.

Institution of ideological censorship in GNU project is pretty heavily related to the future of GNU system.

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

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Dmitry Alexandrov <321942@gmail.com> [2019-10-12 21:26]:
> ams@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) wrote:
> Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> The GNU project should publish a list of ideologies that are officially banned from its channels so people know what they're in for.  All other topics should be treated neutrally so long as nobody is using slurs or a bullying attitude.  Codes of conduct should clarify whether a rule such as no homophobia simply means no homophobic slurs/bullying, or whether it means that certain ideologies are banned and others favored.
> >
> > Can everyone move this discussion elsewhere?
> 
> Where?
> 
> > Seeing that this is not related to the GNU system or Guix.
> 
> Institution of ideological censorship in GNU project is pretty
> heavily related to the future of GNU system.

We shall follow the principle to avoid any politics in FSF or GNU. or
FSF owned pages for reasons that FSF when allowing such activity is
prone to lose the tax-free status.

References:
https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-ban-on-political-campaign-intervention-by-501c3-organizations

GNU.ORG domain belongs to FSF. FSF is not policing their own pages,
like GUIX.GNU.ORG

Page and subdomain Guix.gnu.org belong to FSF.

It does not matter that several people said "GNU is different", that
is gibberish for the law maker.

Please refer to this statement of the USA tax office IRS:
https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-ban-on-political-campaign-intervention-by-501c3-organizations-website-postings-and-links

A website is a form of communication.  If an organization posts
something on its website that favors or opposes a candidate for public
office, it is prohibited political campaign activity.  Posting
information on its website is the same as if the organization
distributed printed material or made oral statements or broadcasts
that favored or opposed a candidate.

If an organization establishes a link to another website, it is
responsible for the consequences of establishing and maintaining that
link, even if the organization does not have control over the content
of the linked site.  Because the linked content may change, the
organization should monitor the linked content and adjust or remove
any links that could result in prohibited political campaign activity.

The Thoughtpolice Squad[1] did not chose to mention any candidate for
public office, but they have taken a political stance dangerous enough
that they could as well do such action without FSF knowing what is
going on, and it would harm the tax-free status of teh FSF.

The non-profit organization such as FSF is supposed to remain
non-partisan.

These facts are valid for gnu-system-discuss mailing list as well.

GNU shall remain apolitical for the same reasons that emergency room
in hospitals is apolitical. It is for the same reasons as freedom
zero. It is for the same reasons as Red Cross activity and numerous
other organizations that are helping people without asking members
what stance they take in the feminism politics.

It would be good if it really becomes so.

Jean Louis

Footnotes:
[1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 7:09 PM, <ams@gnu.org> wrote:

> Can everyone move this discussion elsewhere? Seeing that this is not
> related to the GNU system or Guix.

I resisted replying for a few days, hoping that the moderators would lock people like Louis out and the thread down, but as that didn't happen, I didn't want to let them run free with their reactionary b.s.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ricardo Wurmus]

P <pronaip@protonmail.com> writes:

> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 7:09 PM, <ams@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Can everyone move this discussion elsewhere? Seeing that this is not
>> related to the GNU system or Guix.
>
> I resisted replying for a few days, hoping that the moderators would
> lock people like Louis out and the thread down, but as that didn't
> happen, I didn't want to let them run free with their reactionary b.s.

It’s difficult to put out fires everywhere at once, especially when list
moderation is nowhere near the highest priority in my life at this point
in time.

There’s been a little hiccup with moderation (which had been in place
temporarily).  Please report problems like this to
guix-maintainers@gnu.org and try to not engage with obvious trolls in
the meantime.

--
Ricardo

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Alexander Vdolainen]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2696 bytes --]



On 10/12/19 9:43 PM, Taylan Kammer wrote:
> On 12.10.2019 01:04, Jelle Licht wrote:
>> Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> [snip]
(skipped)
> 
> Going by this logic, we could ban support of communism based on things
> done by the Soviet or things currently done by the People's Republic of
> China or North Korea.
just to be more detailed - it's not a pure communism, it's some form of
communism-based authoritarian way. (btw, communism sucks anyway)
> 
> There are many religious people who think homosexuality is "wrong" but
> strongly disagree with violence, and rather feel "worried for" gay
> people who they also try to treat with love.  I think they are very
> wrong about homosexuality, but I find it commendable that they don't
> tolerate violence, and could not in good conscience call them evil and
> request them to be silenced.  In fact, I would not enjoy contributing to
> a community that does so.
I'm not religious one, however I suppose homosexuality is wrong (or it's
some kind of disease to limit population with malformed genes). BUT, I
will *never* oppose them just because they are wrong some kind.
Moreover, I do *not* care about it. And I do *not* support any movement
against homosexuality. BUT, I do *not* support any movement supporting
this, especially those who are using dirty methods such as we can
observe right now (against RMS I mean), and going further - those
methods are going to looks like a pure fascism against normal people.
> 
> IMO the tabooing of world views based on harms they may cause, or harms
> they do cause in various parts of the world, is a slippery slope.
> Almost every ideology has peaceful moderates and militant extremists.
> 
> The GNU project should publish a list of ideologies that are officially
> banned from its channels so people know what they're in for.  All other
> topics should be treated neutrally so long as nobody is using slurs or a
> bullying attitude.  Codes of conduct should clarify whether a rule such
> as "no homophobia" simply means no homophobic slurs/bullying, or whether
> it means that certain ideologies are banned and others favored.
GNU is a technical community - and as a community shouldn't care about
someone's politics view or homosexuality. It should be neutral for such
things.
> 
> 
> (I've been using religion and homophobia as an arbitrary example.
> Should anyone feel upset by this choice of example, please tell me in
> private or otherwise so I can switch to another example.  Although I
> don't wish to write much more on this off-topic topic...)
> 
> 
> - Taylan
> 

-- 
Alexander Vdolainen,
Evil contractor.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 659 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

Communism is off-topic for this list.  So homosexuality or
any other form of gender orientation.  Please don't discuss those
topics here, or in any GNU mailing list.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > The GNU project should publish a list of ideologies that are officially
  > banned from its channels so people know what they're in for.

No ideology is "banned" on GNU Project mailing lists, but they are off
topic so people should not discuss them here.



-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

I am against bias against any group -- including women -- and the
criticisms of me are due to my clumsiness in treating women I hoped
would like me.  Since I was doing the best I knew how, I don't deserve
condemnation.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

Dear Taylan,

See my comments below.

* Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com> [2019-10-11 20:42]:
> On 07.10.2019 16:32, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > Hello Guix!
> >
> > We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> > Project, are publishing this statement today:
> >
> >    https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
> >
> > We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better
> > place, but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.
> > (Ricardo and I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and
> > Marius were on-board.)
> >
> > This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in
> > detail but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer
> > any questions you may have.  :-)
> >
> > Ludo’.
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Some drama about this leaked out of my mailing list-specific sub-folders
> (which I only skim occasionally) into my main INBOX, so of course I had to
> jump straight into it even though I'm barely around these days. ;-)
> 
> 
> Jokes aside, I wanted to ask:
> 
> Hasn't RMS already officially stepped down?  What position does he hold
> within today's GNU project other than being a wise old person (wise with
> respect to his topics of expertise) who is respected a lot?

RMS is doing what he was doing last decades, promoting free software
in the world, establishing policies, finding allies, finding donations
for the FSF, establishing free software licenses, providing
infrastructure through FSF for free sofware.

For example on September 4th 2019, he visited Microsoft Research and
promoted GNU, GNU GPL, difference between GNU and Linux kernel and
asked for polishing of Github licensing requirement, see:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/

His position as a leader need not be technical as that may be is
something that you are expecting. There are many technical-only free
software projects, but that is not free software politics.

RMS is politican in regards to free software.

Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other people who are introducing
their pro-feminist political views into the apolitical GNU project
are mixing the independent GNU project with their feminist stances.

But GNU project was, is, and will be always apolitical. Freedom zero
is apolitical. And GNU project was for everybody, something that
Ludovic Courtès, Andy Wingo and other members of the Thoughtpolice
Squad[1] do not allow. They must punish anybody in GNU project for
Thoughtcrime[2].

> From what I can tell, the GNU project is a collection of very
> loosely coupled sub-projects and the maintainers and contributors
> collectively hold a lot more power than any single person.  So in a
> way I guess I don't really see what the statement is trying to
> accomplish, although I agree with the sentiment of it.  What is the
> desired effect and end result of publishing the statement?

What they wish to achieve is to remove Stallman for reasons of
Thoughtcrime as he expressed viewpoints such as abort() joke and Emacs
Virgin jokes that were offending for pro-feminist movement, so they
introduce feminist related political crap into GNU project and wish to
remove Stallman.

But GNU project and Stallman was and is apolitical in everything
related to free software.

Personal views of Stallman, of Ludovioc Courtès or Andy Wingo can be
published elsewhere, just as Andy Wingo published that fact-less
nonsense on his own blog.

None of them is true free software politician, they are of technical
sort of people, programmers, not knowing how to make differences in
society others but by programming.

They are not holding speeches or trying to police Github policy on
licensing issues.

They are bashing on RMS and anybody else who is contra-feminist, which
has no place neither in Guix nor in GNU projects.

As GNU project is apolitical and will stay so. It is welcoming nazis,
as long as they do not abuse GNU project resources for their political
views, and it is welcoming anti-nazis and anti-fashists for as long as
they stick to GNU project free software politics and not abuse GNU
project for their political purposes.

It is welcoming feminists and those supporting feminist views, like
few of Guix people, but for as long as they do not abuse the GNU
project for the reasons of their outside politics.

Yet they abused it.

> Assuming the talk about RMS's behavior includes his voicing of
> certain unpopular opinions, rather than just behavior that directly
> targets a person (like undesired advances), are we going to have a
> discussion about which opinions are considered taboo within the GNU
> project?

That is exactly the point. We shall not and principle that RMS have
set for GNU is to remain apolitical, no politics within GNU project
others but free software and human rights related to computing.

One thing that people agree upon is GNU as free operating system, this
brings all people together, canibalists, and those who are not, people
eating their nail skin, and those who are not eating their nail skin,
people who abort children, and those who do not abort children,
feminists and non-feminists, and independent people, nazis, not-nazis,
criminals of all kinds, and decent people, all kinds of religious
people and atheists, it really does not matter. GNU project was
apolitical and is apolitical.

> That is, opinions which shall not be expressed while working with
> other GNU contributors, or not expressed publicly at all by high
> ranking representatives such as maintainers of important (or any)
> packages?

The principle have been already set. See:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html "Please don't
raise unrelated political issues in GNU Project discussions, because
they are off-topic. 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. 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."

Guix leaders think they can take feminist stances on GNU project
pages.

I think they shall either refrain from doing so, or somebody from FSF
or GNU like RMS himself shall remove their political stances from
guix.gnu.org, or they shall have balls and make their own
feminist-only free software project and make it elsewhere but not
while abusing GNU and FSF resources. If feminists would have balls, I
don't know.

> I wouldn't be *categorically* opposed to such limitations.  For instance I
> would welcome a rule that officially bans sympathizing with
> neo-Nazis.

GNU project and GNU software project pages shall be free of any
politics.

Whatever any GNU maintainer is thinking beyond the GNU project and GNU
project software pages shall not be punishable by any kind of
Thoughtpolice Squads.

> My personal suggestion would be to keep a very small list of
> explicit limitations, probably just the support or apologia of
> neo-Nazism and child sexual exploitation.

If you introduce such ideas, you are opposing freedom zero.

GNU project shall remain apolitical. Regardless if criminal hyrself is
writing GNU software.

Authors of GNU software shall have full liability for whatever
political personal views. Same for GNU maintainers and same for RMS.

And such political views shall be forbidden on GNU project pages.

Simple.

Take politics out of GNU.

That was what was creating community.

Introducing feminism into GNU is what is destroying community.

> Voicing such opinions on any channel of the GNU project would be a
> reason to terminate someone's access to the channel.

Yes, but in mild manner to first warn the person to keep politics out.

> Voicing them on any public channel would disqualify someone from
> maintainer and similar positions, and perhaps allow other members to
> raise a complaint against their involvement as a contributor too.

Voicing politics other but free software as a maintainer should be
considered treason and person shall be removed immediately. That is
abuse of community's values.

> I think it's important to have such an explicitly and clearly laid out set
> of rules on what world-views get to be silenced, as otherwise you get
> repeated arguments about free speech.

I totally agreed on that. It is already here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html

"Please don't raise unrelated political issues in GNU Project
discussions, because they are off-topic. 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. 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."

It is just about enforcing, somebody has to enforce it.

> All other political conflicts should IMO be decided on a case by
> case basis with the goal of reaching mutual compromise within the
> confines of the communication channels of the GNU project.

I don't think so. Nobody in GNU project shall use GNU resources to
discuss any politics other but free software politics.

> That is, 1. no favorites on who gets to silence who and 2. the
> silencing shall be limited to the project's communication channels.
> For example let's take homosexuality and religion.  A gay community
> member could request another member to refrain from expressing
> religious views critical of homosexuality within the project's
> communication channels, as it offends her or him.  On the flip side,
> a religious person could request another member to refrain from
> expressing political views in support of normalizing homosexuality
> within society, because that in turn offends them.  Outside channels
> of communication of the project, both could express their opinions.

It shall simply remain outside, moderators shall just take it outside
or suggest them other appropriate channels.

Thank you Taylan for thoughtfull well written article.

Jean Louis


Footnotes:
[1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police

[2]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)]

On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 03:06:31PM +0200, Jean Louis wrote:
> Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other people who are introducing
> their pro-feminist political views into the apolitical GNU project
> are mixing the independent GNU project with their feminist stances.
> 

Thank you for making clear arguments.  I believe there is disagreement
with some core points.

GNU projects should be feminist, because losing contributors, users
and advocates because of toxic behavior harms free software.  This is
not unrelated politics.  It is very important.

IMHO it would be sad to lose the support of RMS who continues to do so
much for GNU.  Endorsing RMS as the GNU Project’s leader could be seen
as endorsing bad behavior though which harms the GNU operating system.

I thank the GNU maintainers for their stance and am sorry for
prolonging this discussion even though all arguments were already
given somewhere before.

Regards,
Florian

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* pelzflorian <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> [2019-10-12 15:38]:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 03:06:31PM +0200, Jean Louis wrote:
> > Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other people who are introducing
> > their pro-feminist political views into the apolitical GNU project
> > are mixing the independent GNU project with their feminist stances.
> > 
> 
> Thank you for making clear arguments.  I believe there is disagreement
> with some core points.
> 
> GNU projects should be feminist, because losing contributors, users
> and advocates because of toxic behavior harms free software.  This is
> not unrelated politics.  It is very important.

I am sorry, which software got harmed?

It does not harm any software. I did not see any harm. Did some byte
of software change because of somebody's thinking? That would be one
unexplainable instance of telekinesis that I would like to observe.

When somebody expresses ANY opinion is not considered "harm" in my
opinion.

Please Florian, maybe you are from Germany, in Germany it is forbidden
to show Swastika, right? So it is censorship of free speech. If I
would bring Swastika from Nagpur, India, where I came from yesterday,
they would charge me for having a symbol of good luck that many people
use in Nagpur.

GNU is meant for all people and it is planetary project, and not
Western world feminist project only, and it shall take any stance in
any kind of politics but free software politics.

Let us not be opportunists that place expediency above other
principles, that consider good feelings with "everybody" more
important than free software principles.

So NO POLITICS IN GNU PROJECT!

Do you understand that GNU project has planetary importance?

So your stance on feminism is also directly connected to Islam, what
will be next, to prevent Muslim people using free software? What is
next? What is next?

> IMHO it would be sad to lose the support of RMS who continues to do
> so much for GNU.  

His support is never lost.

He has laid out the free software philosophy and GNU manifesto, and
principles, and rule that GNU shall not follow any politics but free
software politics.

So his support is never lost unless all the supporters of free
software philosophy suddenly die in one planetary catastrophe.

> Endorsing RMS as the GNU Project’s leader could be seen as endorsing
> bad behavior though which harms the GNU operating system.

There are millions of people thinking different, why care about it?

What you think will happen in 30 years from now? Some other movement
requesting GNU to be nice to their politics?

Nonsense.

> I thank the GNU maintainers for their stance and am sorry for
> prolonging this discussion even though all arguments were already
> given somewhere before.

There are no arguments Florian. Even my son has same name as you.

Florian, FSF ist nicht Deutschland. Please try to understand what is
free speech. People shall not be punished for free speech.

RMS did not even say what is said that he has said. At least be right
to yourself to verify the facts.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

See more:
https://fsforce.noblogs.org/
https://backtotheaugust.org/

See this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UbQ1kc1vQU or
https://watchkin.com/y/7UbQ1kc1vQU

How about watching this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE

Please STATE the facts.

If you would make your judgment according to German constitution, I
would be fine, but you are not. Nobody is guilty of any crime, so do
not make RMS guilty of Thoughtcrime.

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

Dne 12. 10. 19 v 15:38 pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) napsal(a):
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 03:06:31PM +0200, Jean Louis wrote:
>> Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other people who are introducing
>> their pro-feminist political views into the apolitical GNU project
>> are mixing the independent GNU project with their feminist stances.
>>
> GNU projects should be feminist

It is not clear whether current troubles are linked to feminism or other
*ism or just interests of some corporations. But what is clear is that
different people have naturally and constantly different opinions on
various *isms. And the point is that mixing *isms into the free software
development, will cause community breakdown. We would be spending time
with pointless quarrels (as you can see right now) instead of developing
useful free software for everybody (freedom 0).

Franta

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* František Kučera <konference@frantovo.cz> [2019-10-12 19:13]:
> Dne 12. 10. 19 v 15:38 pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) napsal(a):
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 03:06:31PM +0200, Jean Louis wrote:
> >> Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other people who are introducing
> >> their pro-feminist political views into the apolitical GNU project
> >> are mixing the independent GNU project with their feminist stances.
> >>
> > GNU projects should be feminist
> 
> It is not clear whether current troubles are linked to feminism or other
> *ism or just interests of some corporations. But what is clear is that
> different people have naturally and constantly different opinions on
> various *isms. And the point is that mixing *isms into the free software
> development, will cause community breakdown. We would be spending time
> with pointless quarrels (as you can see right now) instead of developing
> useful free software for everybody (freedom 0).

It is dividing the community.

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:22 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:

> -   František Kučera konference@frantovo.cz [2019-10-12 19:13]:
>
> > Dne 12. 10. 19 v 15:38 pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) napsal(a):
> >
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 03:06:31PM +0200, Jean Louis wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other people who are introducing
> > > > their pro-feminist political views into the apolitical GNU project
> > > > are mixing the independent GNU project with their feminist stances.
> > >
> > > GNU projects should be feminist
> >
> > It is not clear whether current troubles are linked to feminism or other
> > *ism or just interests of some corporations. But what is clear is that
> > different people have naturally and constantly different opinions on
> > various *isms. And the point is that mixing *isms into the free software
> > development, will cause community breakdown. We would be spending time
> > with pointless quarrels (as you can see right now) instead of developing
> > useful free software for everybody (freedom 0).
>
> It is dividing the community.
>
> Jean

If "women should be welcome in tech" is a step too far for you, then you are too whiny to be useful in tech.

And technology is ALWAYS political. If you think otherwise, you are naive to an almost childish level.

Funny how politics in tech are not a problem to you people when it's politics you already agree with. But now you have to make a tiny sacrifice, improve just a teensy bit as a human being, and suddenly you're scared.

And if the divide is between "people who want free software to be inclusive" and "people who don't want their leaders to be held responsible" then I welcome that divide.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2942 bytes --]

P,
The problem is when that politics gets extreme.
For example at the point to change the rules of a human language just for
politics reason.

The guixSD Spanish manual for example says : 'la usuaria' to refer to every
user

But in Spanish 'la usuaria' only refers to a female user, and 'el usuario'
refer to every user, a male or both to be more exact.

The rules to create a gender neutral language in the manual in some
languages as the Spanish is not possible, because there is not way to
achieve that in Spanish at least.

But also the the new rule is creating a 'feminist languaje' due to 'la
usuaria' is only for woman's


The reason to do that is only political, the argument is the woman's feels
not get represented when you says 'el usuario'.
But in the real world, only a feminist person can say that.

The translation work should be translate a lenguaje to another, not create
a new languaje' to accommodate your political ideas.

Don't you think that is extreme?

Regards

El sáb., 12 de octubre de 2019 13:37, P <pronaip@protonmail.com> escribió:

> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:22 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>
> wrote:
>
> > -   František Kučera konference@frantovo.cz [2019-10-12 19:13]:
> >
> > > Dne 12. 10. 19 v 15:38 pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) napsal(a):
> > >
> > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 03:06:31PM +0200, Jean Louis wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other people who are introducing
> > > > > their pro-feminist political views into the apolitical GNU project
> > > > > are mixing the independent GNU project with their feminist stances.
> > > >
> > > > GNU projects should be feminist
> > >
> > > It is not clear whether current troubles are linked to feminism or
> other
> > > *ism or just interests of some corporations. But what is clear is that
> > > different people have naturally and constantly different opinions on
> > > various *isms. And the point is that mixing *isms into the free
> software
> > > development, will cause community breakdown. We would be spending time
> > > with pointless quarrels (as you can see right now) instead of
> developing
> > > useful free software for everybody (freedom 0).
> >
> > It is dividing the community.
> >
> > Jean
>
> If "women should be welcome in tech" is a step too far for you, then you
> are too whiny to be useful in tech.
>
> And technology is ALWAYS political. If you think otherwise, you are naive
> to an almost childish level.
>
> Funny how politics in tech are not a problem to you people when it's
> politics you already agree with. But now you have to make a tiny sacrifice,
> improve just a teensy bit as a human being, and suddenly you're scared.
>
> And if the divide is between "people who want free software to be
> inclusive" and "people who don't want their leaders to be held responsible"
> then I welcome that divide.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4016 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> [2019-10-12 19:47]:
> P,
> The problem is when that politics gets extreme.
> For example at the point to change the rules of a human language just for
> politics reason.
> 
> The guixSD Spanish manual for example says : 'la usuaria' to refer to every
> user

I understand that certain languages have only he or she uses, then in
such case is not right to step into one side, but to mention "usuaria"
or "usuario", mentioning both sexes.

> But in Spanish 'la usuaria' only refers to a female user, and 'el usuario'
> refer to every user, a male or both to be more exact.
> 
> The rules to create a gender neutral language in the manual in some
> languages as the Spanish is not possible, because there is not way to
> achieve that in Spanish at least.

Then make the point by including both sexes in the text.

> But also the the new rule is creating a 'feminist languaje' due to 'la
> usuaria' is only for woman's

So the new rule is made by feminists? That has no place in any GNU
project. It is incorrect to favor one group over the other. GNU
project is apolitical.

> The reason to do that is only political, the argument is the woman's
> feels not get represented when you says 'el usuario'.

Which women? Please make specific statistic. In public relations one
has to do survey, and normally minimum of 1000 people would be asked
in a neutral manner.

You would go to Spain or spanish speaking country, and you would give
them the text to be read without influencing a person in any
manner. Then you would ask questions if text is alright and if they
feel discriminated by any manner?

Next question would be if they feel discriminated by using usuario
instead usuaria.

And then you would ask would it be better to use both usuario/a in the
text.

And you would ask for some other solution.

Then you would evaluate answers from 1000 people. Then such survey
could be published and given to GNU decision makers to further make it
just for people who feel discriminated.

But in those countries where usuario is used, there is meaning in
dictionaries that it does not mean only male, but also female. It is
shortage of the language.

Invent the word.

But don't stand on one side, as it is nonsense to say that usuario
would only be politically correct as it is not.

> But in the real world, only a feminist person can say that.
> 
> The translation work should be translate a lenguaje to another, not create
> a new languaje' to accommodate your political ideas.

If local language does not support neutral gender I think it is
alright to create new language in any of GNU texts so to exclude any
affected group and be politically neutral and welcoming to everybody.

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:46 PM, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:

> Don't you think that is extreme?

I do not. What's extreme is that you feel like such a tiny thing is extreme. Quit your whining or find a new hobby.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* P <pronaip@protonmail.com> [2019-10-12 20:00]:
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:46 PM, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Don't you think that is extreme?
> 
> I do not. What's extreme is that you feel like such a tiny thing is extreme. Quit your whining or find a new hobby.

I do not know which tiny thing is extreme that you think that I think
that it is extreme, in fact I did not even use that word "extreme"
until now, so I wonder if you are maybe mentalist.

Further, I do not conform to normal boundaries, and thus anything
"extreme" for you is maybe not extreme for me, as you obviously tend
to have it under your own set boundaries which I cannot relate to,
neither know what you mean, as I do not know what is for you normal or
extreme, and my protest is certainly not there to accommodate your or
anybody else way of thinking.

GNU project is there not to accommodate anybody's viewpoints. That
software shall be free is already extreme to many people and that is
not changing the GNU project's intentions.

Being or having extreme way of doing things makes no change in free
software philosophy.

That the vicious politicizing of Guix has brought division into the
community and made impact, yes it did make an impact.

Turn to the cause of politics in Guix which is Ludovic Courtès and the
other members of the Thoughtpolice Squad. Ask them to build a system
that is feminist-only. GNU will remain apolitical project.

So stop whining or find a new place to abuse some other community,
finally there are many feminist communities out there where you can
join and promote your views.

This is free software community that welcomes everybody without asking
who is thinking what, and without politicizing over people by their
viewpoints. 

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 6:22 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:

> -   P pronaip@protonmail.com [2019-10-12 20:00]:
>
> > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> > On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:46 PM, Wilson Bustos wrbutros@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Don't you think that is extreme?
> >
> > I do not. What's extreme is that you feel like such a tiny thing is extreme. Quit your whining or find a new hobby.
>
> I do not know which tiny thing is extreme that you think that I think
> that it is extreme, in fact I did not even use that word "extreme"

That's because I wasn't replying to you. Read more carefully next time.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 538 bytes --]

Change a language's rules to fit your politics because you feel the normal
language is offensive,is actually extreme.

All the best,

El sáb., 12 oct. 2019 a las 15:00, P (<pronaip@protonmail.com>) escribió:

> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:46 PM, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Don't you think that is extreme?
>
> I do not. What's extreme is that you feel like such a tiny thing is
> extreme. Quit your whining or find a new hobby.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 912 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 310 bytes --]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 6:24 PM, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:

> Change a language's rules to fit your politics because you feel the normal language is offensive,is actually extreme.
> All the best,

Language changes. Get over it.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 522 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 704 bytes --]

>> Language changes. Get over it.

Actually the spanish language has not changed in that sent.
No one talks in 'political correctness spanish' or in 'feminist spanish'.
So you are not writing spanish itself, just a modified version pushed by
political agenda.

All the best =)

El sáb., 12 oct. 2019 a las 15:32, P (<pronaip@protonmail.com>) escribió:

> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 6:24 PM, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Change a language's rules to fit your politics because you feel the normal
> language is offensive,is actually extreme.
> All the best,
>
> Language changes. Get over it.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1379 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 521 bytes --]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 7:04 PM, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> Language changes. Get over it.
>
> Actually the spanish language has not changed in that sent.
> No one talks in 'political correctness spanish' or in 'feminist spanish'.
> So you are not writing spanish itself, just a modified version pushed by political agenda.
> All the best =)

And that modified version is better, since it doesn't make women second-class citizens.
Bye

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 788 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 739 bytes --]

How the normal language make women be a second-class citizens?

That is ridiculous!

Regards

El sáb., 12 oct. 2019 a las 16:24, P (<pronaip@protonmail.com>) escribió:

> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 7:04 PM, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> Language changes. Get over it.
>
> Actually the spanish language has not changed in that sent.
> No one talks in 'political correctness spanish' or in 'feminist spanish'.
> So you are not writing spanish itself, just a modified version pushed by
> political agenda.
> All the best =)
>
> And that modified version is better, since it doesn't make women
> second-class citizens.
> Bye
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1348 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

Dne 12. 10. 19 v 21:28 Wilson Bustos napsal(a):
> How the normal language make women be a second-class citizens?
>
> That is ridiculous!

+1

BTW: In Czech language we have a word „osoba“ which means a „person“.
And „osoba“ is grammatically feminine (she) but denotes both men and
women. And – it might surprise many here – but: no one complains.

Franta

Reminder about discussions on this list

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Wilson and P,

this is not a discussion for guix-devel.  Please don’t continue it on
this list.

Please also note that the aggression demonstrated in your exchange is
not what we want to see in our community.  If you take this elsewhere
please remember to allow for some time to cool off before responding to
a message that frustrates you.

--
Ricardo

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1247 bytes --]

Dne 12. 10. 19 v 21:24 P napsal(a):
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 7:04 PM, Wilson Bustos
> <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> Language changes. Get over it.
>>
>> Actually the spanish language has not changed in that sent.
>> No one talks in 'political correctness spanish' or in 'feminist spanish'.
>> So you are not writing spanish itself, just a modified version pushed
>> by political agenda.
>> All the best =)
> And that modified version is better

This is your opinion. But it is totally irrelevant to free software. Is
it better to drive on the right side of the road or on the left side? Is
better Jerry Lee Lewis or Elvis Presley? Do you like cats or dogs? Yes,
people have opinions, it is OK. But please, do not disturb the free
software cooperation with your efforts to convince others of your
„truth“. Developing free software is a great goal in itself.

If you are still not sure what free software is, please ask Richard
Stallman who defined this term.

Franta

P.S. technical note to all: please do not add my address as an explicit
recipient – it is superfluous – just respond to the mailing list and I
will get your e-mail.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2417 bytes --]

Re: “do not add my address as an explicit recipient” (was: Joint statement on the GNU Project)

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 690 bytes --]

František Kučera <konference@frantovo.cz> wrote:
> P.S. technical note to all: please do not add my address as an explicit recipient – it is superfluous – just respond to the mailing list and I will get your e-mail.

I beg my pardon.  Even if we put aside, that this is bad practice that harms readability and searchability of mailing lists, how do suppose everyone to follow that request — by keeping it in mind or what?

If you are insisting on it, at least try to formalize it: set ‘Mail-Copies-To’ header to ‘never’ and configure your useragent to insert ‘Mail-Followup-To’ that does not include your address (afair, Thunderbird is capable doing it properly).

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

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> [2019-10-12 20:25]:
> Change a language's rules to fit your politics because you feel the normal
> language is offensive,is actually extreme.
> 
> All the best

Alright, that is your opinion.

Related to GNU project and welcoming of everybody, and always
appreciating and respecting free speech, I would rather change the
language.

Language was never fixed and static. It changes all the time. It even
changes in 20 years that much that your own people will recognize you
were living in some other country as you are using words which are not
commonly used any more. I have tried it and so I know it.

I am suggesting:
https://www.ted.com/playlists/228/how_language_changes_over_time

https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-language-change-1691096

https://www.linguisticsociety.org/content/english-changing

In my language we have He, She, It.

In some languages there does not exist "It".

GNU is representing not only that GNU has not get any animal, it has
also nice anthelope named gnu or wildebeest that exist in Swahili
speaking countries such as Kenya or Tanzania.

A word "safari" means "travel" and has been adopted in many languages
from Swahili and so in that sense safari changed many other languages.

Maybe we shall simply adopt using Swahili version of He/She.

They refer to gender in a written representation of “he or she” used
as a neutral alternative to indicate someone of either sex.

yeye is easy to pronounce for all people in all the world.

The introduction of Safari and "yeye" one can use in GNU manuals to
refer to gender neutral pronoun without knowing does it mean he or
she.

See references from Google translation below, that I got through GNU
Emacs.

Translate from English to Swahili:

He

yeye

pronoun
 1. yeye (he, she, him)

DEFINITION

symbol
 1. the chemical element helium.

noun
 1. a male; a man.
    "is that a he or a she?"

pronoun
 1. used to refer to a man, boy, or male animal previously mentioned or easily identified.
    "Shane has a nice little punch, but he never hurt me with a solid shot."




Translate from English to Swahili:

she

yeye

pronoun
 1. yeye (he, she, him)

DEFINITION

pronoun
 1. used to refer to a woman, girl, or female animal previously mentioned or easily identified.
    "He is a lonely old man who saw a young girl and told her she was beautiful."

noun
 1. a female; a woman.
    "I hope I haven't mixed up her sex, I think she's a she …"

pronoun
 1. a written representation of “he or she” used as a neutral alternative to indicate someone of either sex.




Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[zimoun]

Dear Wilson,


On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 at 19:47, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:

> For example at the point to change the rules of a human language just for politics reason.

I do not understand your point because you gently asked about this
rule in this message on the 31rst of July.

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-07/msg00457.html

Then Miguel (the only translator referenced in
po/doc/guix-manual.es.po) provided you a detailed answer:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-07/msg00458.html

And you agreed on the answer, I quote you using your reply:

<<Thank you so much! that article resolve really well my question!>>

And now, you seem so angry... maybe you should take a breath.


> Don't you think that is extreme?

Ah, I am still confused by your current words and the previous ones on July.

<<
>> Right now, yes. If you want to help, that'd make it two. :-)
Ahh ok! I will

>> Well, actually https://translationproject.org is the real platform for the translation process, but we could define any workflow as needed, I think. We can agree about that privately or on the tp list (address@hidden), if needed.

Nice! I'm will check that
>>

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-07/msg00462.html

Hum? I have not seen any of your patches. Therefore, if you think the
translation is not accurate enough, please submit improvements instead
of spending so much time on pointless emails.
"Speak does not cook the rice."


All the best,
simon

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3193 bytes --]

I explain in my answer my reasons,
For me if is about collaboration, I'll do it anyway even if I'm totally
disagree with the gender politics and I was completely clear in my message,
In the same message I said that Is more important is have an Spanish
version that have nothing at all, even if that Spanish version is a
feminist version,
because once it is finish in the future is possible fix it for a normal
spanish.

And in my free time I was learning about how to translate those text, and I
started fixing the un-correct spanish for myself,
(I understand also I cannot send that fixed-spanish to the project because
you will reject it).

And I still was on the way to translate the other part of english to
political-correct-spanish to collaborate with you.
So as you can see even if I was completely disagree with your ideas I
wanted to help (as I shows you in my message),
But all that you did lastly shows how much your politics are inside the
project even before what you do to Stallman.

That makes me feel uncomfortable with this project and I'm also sure that
the same is what happen with a lot of more persons.
I'm an example about how a persons who wanted to help to this project feels
disagree with your path and get regret to do it.

Anyway you seems happy to see how someone that wanted to collaborate at the
end didn't do it,
Should be all the opposite, right?

Thank you so much for your support ;)

Regards.


El lun., 14 oct. 2019 a las 10:30, zimoun (<zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>)
escribió:

> Dear Wilson,
>
>
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 at 19:47, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > For example at the point to change the rules of a human language just
> for politics reason.
>
> I do not understand your point because you gently asked about this
> rule in this message on the 31rst of July.
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-07/msg00457.html
>
> Then Miguel (the only translator referenced in
> po/doc/guix-manual.es.po) provided you a detailed answer:
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-07/msg00458.html
>
> And you agreed on the answer, I quote you using your reply:
>
> <<Thank you so much! that article resolve really well my question!>>
>
> And now, you seem so angry... maybe you should take a breath.
>
>
> > Don't you think that is extreme?
>
> Ah, I am still confused by your current words and the previous ones on
> July.
>
> <<
> >> Right now, yes. If you want to help, that'd make it two. :-)
> Ahh ok! I will
>
> >> Well, actually https://translationproject.org is the real platform for
> the translation process, but we could define any workflow as needed, I
> think. We can agree about that privately or on the tp list (address@hidden),
> if needed.
>
> Nice! I'm will check that
> >>
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-07/msg00462.html
>
> Hum? I have not seen any of your patches. Therefore, if you think the
> translation is not accurate enough, please submit improvements instead
> of spending so much time on pointless emails.
> "Speak does not cook the rice."
>
>
> All the best,
> simon
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4339 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[zimoun]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 at 18:14, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:

> That makes me feel uncomfortable with this project and I'm also sure that the same is what happen with a lot of more persons.
> I'm an example about how a persons who wanted to help to this project feels disagree with your path and get regret to do it.

You miss how any GNU project works. The key point is the do-ocracy:
the people who are currently doing decide how they want to do.

Therefore, please discuss, correct and commit change to the
Translation Project (TP). As you can see, the TP is not only about GNU
Guix and the Spanish team translates a lot of packages.

https://translationproject.org/team/es.html

Instead of being so angry (state), please propose concrete changes (action).

Any GNU project does not exist by itself but because people are doing.


> Anyway you seems happy to see how someone that wanted to collaborate at the end didn't do it,

Talk is cheap. Show me the code -- Linus Torvalds


> Thank you so much for your support ;)

I will be happy to share with you some tips about translation.


All the best,
simon

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2650 bytes --]

> You miss how any GNU project works. The key point is the do-ocracy:
> the people who are currently doing decide how they want to do.

I'm completely agree with you, that is why I didn't say to anyone what
should they do or not,
That is also why I accept the female-grammar in that moment. (When I
thought that grammar is about
an attempt to include people, a bad attempt, but an attempt after all).

So what I said in this discussion?
well, I said that in my opinion change a language's rules to fit your
politics because you feel the normal language is offensive,is actually
extreme.

Why I said that?
because now with all that you do, including cancel stallman for his
opinions seems a strongly feminist movement and the translation is one of
the
form in how the feminist movement get expression in this project.

Should I be a contributor to give my opinion?
I think no, that is just my opinion.

> I will be happy to share with you some tips about translation.
I would be happy to, but I will look for a non-feminist project to help,
that is also the reason because I didn't text anything in the guix list the
last 2 days,
and I didn't want to text anything in this list again, because do it would
be not productive for anyone and now I text only because you start to talk
about me.


All the best,
Wilson


El lun., 14 oct. 2019 a las 14:13, zimoun (<zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>)
escribió:

> On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 at 18:14, Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That makes me feel uncomfortable with this project and I'm also sure
> that the same is what happen with a lot of more persons.
> > I'm an example about how a persons who wanted to help to this project
> feels disagree with your path and get regret to do it.
>
> You miss how any GNU project works. The key point is the do-ocracy:
> the people who are currently doing decide how they want to do.
>
> Therefore, please discuss, correct and commit change to the
> Translation Project (TP). As you can see, the TP is not only about GNU
> Guix and the Spanish team translates a lot of packages.
>
> https://translationproject.org/team/es.html
>
> Instead of being so angry (state), please propose concrete changes
> (action).
>
> Any GNU project does not exist by itself but because people are doing.
>
>
> > Anyway you seems happy to see how someone that wanted to collaborate at
> the end didn't do it,
>
> Talk is cheap. Show me the code -- Linus Torvalds
>
>
> > Thank you so much for your support ;)
>
> I will be happy to share with you some tips about translation.
>
>
> All the best,
> simon
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3985 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* P <pronaip@protonmail.com> [2019-10-12 19:38]:
> If women should be welcome in tech is a step too far for you, then
> you are too whiny to be useful in tech.

Every women is welcome in free software and any activity in life if
you ask me.

I never stated different and never will.

In fact I do not observe the sex of person when considering anything
in life, that is only important to women' sexual partners and their
physician, maybe their parents.

Human sex is not base for any discrimination. I do not know how you
find me to pick on that.

Finally I am employing people which are man and female, but I did not
check it even once if it is true and it was never important for
anything.

> And technology is ALWAYS political. If you think otherwise, you are
> naive to an almost childish level.

Technology as general may be political, I don't care, even the term is
used incorrectly, as for example there is technology for cooking, and
technology for cleaning surfaces... it is broad term and you probably
refer to some narrow term.

GNU and free software philosophy is not made to exclude any women or
any men, in fact it does not relate to any other politics but free
software politics. GNU project is apolitical and shall stay so for a
good reason.

The only politics for GNU is free software politics.

Please do not introduce other politics in GNU.

> Funny how politics in tech are not a problem to you people when it's
> politics you already agree with. But now you have to make a tiny
> sacrifice, improve just a teensy bit as a human being, and suddenly
> you're scared.

I must be mistaken, you probably do not address me. I cannot relate to
what you say.

I am sorry, I do not know what "tech" means as I participate and apply
certain technologies that are not related to programming and
software. I may not have as much time as you to review various other
subjects and I am not participating in those communities. My people
are more ground people, like villagers, mostly people who have no
software related experiences.

You are trying to fit me into some frame of mind, but I do not see
myself there. 

> And if the divide is between people who want free software to be
> inclusive and people who don't want their leaders to be held
> responsible then I welcome that divide.

You are free to support politicized software projects, there are
many. GNU project is apolitical, it is not allowing GNU project to be
abused by any kind of politics. I am sorry, that is not GNU free
software philosophy.

Please read the freedom zero.

Please note that GNU project was never excluding any type of groups of
people to use free software. Please read the freedom zero. It was
never published, never applied to discriminate on anybody.

For as long as GNU project remains apolitical for anything but free
software politics, it will continue creating friendly communities.

Introducing any politics, especially feminism, into GNU project is not
welcome. Not because it is feminism, but because it is not free
software politics, it is other politics that people can promote on
other projects.

Leader is responsible and did not say or claim what is claimed for. So
if you have contrary facts, let me know.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

See:
My Thoughts on the Richard Stallman "Scandal" by Jacob
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE

How does Dr. Richard Stallman lead GNU Project?

Dr. Richard Stallman contacts opinion leaders and forwards free software:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/

He teaches the world on free software:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCh8EcBrptA

Dr. Richard Stallman provides policies and planning for GNU project, and he has done so successfuly for many years.

When you have reviewed the facts and not just blindly respond back
with your emotional reaction, let me know, as I like exchanging on
true facts, not emotional or political responses.

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:53 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:

> When you have reviewed the facts and not just blindly respond back
> with your emotional reaction, let me know, as I like exchanging on
> true facts, not emotional or political responses.
>
> Jean

Have you reviewed the facts about harassment and sexism in free software? It doesn't look like you have.

Or did you not bother to click the links in Wingo's blog post?

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:53 PM, Jean Louis bugs@gnu.support wrote:
>
> > When you have reviewed the facts and not just blindly respond back
> > with your emotional reaction, let me know, as I like exchanging on
> > true facts, not emotional or political responses.
> > Jean
>
> Have you reviewed the facts about harassment and sexism in free software? It doesn't look like you have.
>
> Or did you not bother to click the links in Wingo's blog post?

Also just to clarify, I don't give a rat's ass about Motherboard's reporting. Vice is a sleazy outlet.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > Also just to clarify, I don't give a rat's ass about Motherboard's
  > reporting. Vice is a sleazy outlet.

The article about me is based on Selam Gino's misunderstanding of
what I wrote.  It is part of the general campaign of vilification
based on falsehoods.  The people who wrote it may not have known
it was false, so I won't say thay were lying.  But it is false.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* P <pronaip@protonmail.com> [2019-10-12 20:03]:
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:53 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
> 
> > When you have reviewed the facts and not just blindly respond back
> > with your emotional reaction, let me know, as I like exchanging on
> > true facts, not emotional or political responses.
> >
> > Jean
> 
> Have you reviewed the facts about harassment and sexism in free
> software? It doesn't look like you have.

Yes, I did, did not I give you facts?

I have also immediately asked Ludovic Courtès as he was promoting his
feminist views in Guix IRC channel. So Ludovic said it is abort() joke
and Emacs Virgin joke and MIT episodes, see IRC logs from 7th October
and 8th October.

So yes, I did and I asked for facts before anything. I am adult person
and not an immature child that cannot confront other people.

Facts:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/

See:
My Thoughts on the Richard Stallman "Scandal" by Jacob
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE

How does Dr. Richard Stallman lead GNU Project?

Dr. Richard Stallman contacts opinion leaders and forwards free software:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/

He teaches the world on free software:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCh8EcBrptA

> Or did you not bother to click the links in Wingo's blog post?

Yes, I did clck the links, I did not find any facts on their
statement. On two ocassions I have answered to Andy Wingo, and did not
get any answer. Those feminists which I respect in their own
viewpoints, they are spreading the nonsense on other networks, but not
gaining support enough. My last answer, the second one to Wingo is
here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/gnu/comments/dgelag/thoughts_on_rms_and_gnu_wingolog/f3eglgb/

And I welcome and suggest that all feminist politics go to Reddit or
any other pages but remain out of GNU as GNU is apolitical project for
free software only, and free software only.

Jean Louis

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 6:27 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:

> -   P pronaip@protonmail.com [2019-10-12 20:03]:
>
> > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> > On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:53 PM, Jean Louis bugs@gnu.support wrote:
> >
> > > When you have reviewed the facts and not just blindly respond back
> > > with your emotional reaction, let me know, as I like exchanging on
> > > true facts, not emotional or political responses.
> > > Jean
> >
> > Have you reviewed the facts about harassment and sexism in free
> > software? It doesn't look like you have.
>
> Yes, I did, did not I give you facts?
>
> I have also immediately asked Ludovic Courtès as he was promoting his
> feminist views in Guix IRC channel. So Ludovic said it is abort() joke
> and Emacs Virgin joke and MIT episodes, see IRC logs from 7th October
> and 8th October.
>
> So yes, I did and I asked for facts before anything. I am adult person
> and not an immature child that cannot confront other people.
>
> Facts:
> https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/
> https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
>
> See:
> My Thoughts on the Richard Stallman "Scandal" by Jacob
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE
>
> How does Dr. Richard Stallman lead GNU Project?
>
> Dr. Richard Stallman contacts opinion leaders and forwards free software:
> https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/
>
> He teaches the world on free software:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCh8EcBrptA
>
> > Or did you not bother to click the links in Wingo's blog post?
>
> Yes, I did clck the links, I did not find any facts on their
> statement. On two ocassions I have answered to Andy Wingo, and did not
> get any answer. Those feminists which I respect in their own
> viewpoints, they are spreading the nonsense on other networks, but not
> gaining support enough. My last answer, the second one to Wingo is
> here:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/gnu/comments/dgelag/thoughts_on_rms_and_gnu_wingolog/f3eglgb/
>
> And I welcome and suggest that all feminist politics go to Reddit or
> any other pages but remain out of GNU as GNU is apolitical project for
> free software only, and free software only.
>
> Jean Louis

What do you mean by "did not find any facts"?

This is the part I'm especially curious about:

```
The great tragedy of RMS's tenure in the supposedly universalist FSF and GNU projects is that he behaves in a way that is particularly alienating to women. It doesn't take a genius to conclude that if you're personally driving away potential collaborators, that's a bad thing for the organization, and actively harmful to the organization's goals: software freedom is a cause that is explicitly for everyone.

https://twitter.com/quince/status/1172290834974142464
https://twitter.com/corbett/status/994012399656042496
https://twitter.com/starsandrobots/status/994267277460619265
https://twitter.com/alizatw/status/994682557726781440
https://twitter.com/suzanne_hillman/status/994596833761660928
https://twitter.com/MsAmandaDean/status/994162185247997952
https://twitter.com/wiredferret/status/1173042834179534849
https://twitter.com/bella_velo/status/1172524864193945603
https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
```

Can you actually refute their claims?

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* P <pronaip@protonmail.com> [2019-10-12 20:38]:

You have been quoting from Andy Wingo blog:

> The great tragedy of RMS's tenure in the supposedly universalist FSF
> and GNU projects is that he behaves in a way that is particularly
> alienating to women.

GNU project is apolitical. RMS never established any discriminatory
policies for GNU project.

> It doesn't take a genius to conclude that if you're personally
> driving away potential collaborators, that's a bad thing for the
> organization, and actively harmful to the organization's goals:
> software freedom is a cause that is explicitly for everyone.

Not like that. My personal life has nothing with GNU project, that is
what you need to understand. Personal issues are personal.

Do you want to say that anybody in GNU project is now to be
supervised, spyed onto, reviewed, screened, for their personal views,
asking women for date, or for their political statuses before being
accepted in GNU project?

Are you nuts?

> https://twitter.com/quince/status/1172290834974142464

I cannot see any fact there, I see people talking. Is talking wrong?
Ah yes, it is wrong for Thoughtpolice.

No fact.

> https://twitter.com/corbett/status/994012399656042496

"My first interaction with RMS was at a hacker con at 19. He asked my
name, I gave it, whether I went to MIT (I had an MIT shirt on), and
after confirmation I did, asked me on a date. I said no. That was our
entire conversation. Christine, yes, no thanks."

So what?

Is now asking woman for a date wrong? Is it contra-feminist to ask
woman for a date?

She feels proud and important that he asked her, so she tweeted
it. Nothing wrong.

If one would accuse me for asking women for a date, I would get
stoned.

No fact there, just rumor.

> https://twitter.com/starsandrobots/status/994267277460619265

"I remember being walked around campus by an upperclassman getting
advice during my freshman year at MIT. "Look at all the plants in her
office," referring to a professor. "All the women CSAIL professors
keep massive amounts of foliage" s/he said. "Stallman really hates
plants."

so if you find something wrong there, I don't even understand what you
are referring to.

No fact there, just rumor.

> https://twitter.com/alizatw/status/994682557726781440

"I met him at an SF con in Boston. He hit on me in a clueless way. No
thanks."

as me being non-native English speaker, I don't understand that above,
but I don't see how is the SF conference connected to GNU project.

No fact there, just rumor.

> https://twitter.com/suzanne_hillman/status/994596833761660928

"He flirts with anyone who is female, even if they are underage. He is
creepy in person, in a way that I cannot adequately describe. I have
absolutely no doubt in my mind that he kept women out of open source
and free software, and many of his ideas stayed even after he left."

Sorry, I do not know what is wrong here. That Stallman flirts? What
other crime did he commit?

Why no lynch him right away for flirting?

> https://twitter.com/MsAmandaDean/status/994162185247997952

"He and his followers pushed out a whole generation of female
developers, just at that critical time when open source adoption was
widening."

"whole generation of female developers" wow.... not a fact, just
exaggerated opinion.

GNU project has clear policies of non-discrimination against
anybody.

Don't mistake rumor for facts.

Not a fact. Next.

> https://twitter.com/wiredferret/status/1173042834179534849
> https://twitter.com/bella_velo/status/1172524864193945603

Stallman's pleasure cards? Hahahhahaha. Man you really are good for
Thoughtpolice Squad.

I have nothing against you or anybody to promote their politics,
please do, just outside of GNU project.

Not a fact against RMS related to feminist issues statement. It is
just yet another fact that Guix is feminist movement abusing GNU
project for politics.

> https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
> 
> Can you actually refute their claims?

But I need not refute it, I gave you refutals already. Contrary to
you, I have read all of your references in genuine search for facts.

Richard is guilty of what? Flirting? Pleasure Cards? Hahhahahahahahha.

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 6:54 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:

> No fact there, just rumor.

Very well, then your claim that you do not discriminate in your hiring practices is also not a fact, merely a rumor.

You do not seem to judge feminists by the same scale as you judge yourself. After all, many of your claims are only supported by you, but claims about Stallman's behavior are supported by numerous people.

So what does it take for you to consider an eye witness account to be truthful?

Rhetorical question.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

Throughout this discussion I see some implicit assumption that „feminism
= women will like it“. But actually: not all women are feminists.

Franta

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)]

On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 08:54:14PM +0200, Jean Louis wrote:
> Richard is guilty of what? Flirting? Pleasure Cards? Hahhahahahahahha.
> 
> Jean
> 

IMHO this is an important reason.

On Medium in her blog post, Selam G. referenced a report by MIT women
from 1983.  In Chapter 3 it says (please excude any typos of mine):

> 3.1 First a Woman, Then a Professional
> 
> · Do not make inappropriate personal remarks to or about women in
>   professional situations.
> 
>   - Never make demeaning remarks, such as “come sit on my lap
>     sometime…”, in professional situations.
> 
>   - Do not use sexist humor to “spice up a dull subject…” or make
>     disparaging comments about women as a group.
> 
>   - Do not allow a discussion of a female student’s work to be turned
>     into a discussion of her physical attributes or appearance.  In
>     general, do not make more references to women’s appearances or
>     personal lives than to men’s appearances or personal lives.
> 
>  · […]
> 
>  · Faculty members should be careful in approaching female students as
>    dates to avoid putting the women in untenable positions.  The role
>    as potential date must not supersede the professional and academic
>    roles.

Regards,
Florian

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > GNU and free software philosophy is not made to exclude any women or
  > any men, in fact it does not relate to any other politics but free
  > software politics. GNU project is apolitical and shall stay so for a
  > good reason.

  > The only politics for GNU is free software politics.

This is exactly correct.  Most of us have political views about other
issues, but in connection with GNU we should not go further than hint
at them -- not argue for them, let alone propose that the GNU Project
endorse them.  Use your own non-GNU site to present your politics --
as I do.

I speak for the GNU Project as its head.  That doesn't mean I speak
for GNU Project participants.  You don't have to agree with the GNU
Project's free software principles, its goals or its policies to
participate in the GNU Project.  All that is required is to act in
accord with them in your work on GNU.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

Dne 14. 10. 19 v 3:44 Richard Stallman napsal(a):
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
>   > GNU and free software philosophy is not made to exclude any women or
>   > any men, in fact it does not relate to any other politics but free
>   > software politics. GNU project is apolitical and shall stay so for a
>   > good reason.
>
>   > The only politics for GNU is free software politics.
>
> This is exactly correct.  Most of us have political views about other
> issues, but in connection with GNU we should not go further than hint
> at them -- not argue for them, let alone propose that the GNU Project
> endorse them.  Use your own non-GNU site to present your politics --
> as I do.
>
> I speak for the GNU Project as its head.  That doesn't mean I speak
> for GNU Project participants.  You don't have to agree with the GNU
> Project's free software principles, its goals or its policies to
> participate in the GNU Project.  All that is required is to act in
> accord with them in your work on GNU.
>
I totally agree. And this is one of reasons why I love and support free
software:

One of the things I appreciate about free software is that it brings
people from various (social, political, cultural etc.) groups together
and learns them how to cooperate. For example: One might be a communist,
another one might be a libertarian. They can hate each other. Or they
can collaborate on free software development. What is better? This is a
great positive side-effect of free software – it shows how different
people can cooperate in a peaceful way, it makes people better.

We can have various political or other opinions, but in FSF/GNU we
should focus on our common goal which is the free software. It is a
great goal in itself and it makes the world better even without any
other politics.

Franta

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1602 bytes --]

Why should GuixSD feminist?
Free software movement is no about popularity, is about freedom.

If woman's come to the project should be for what we are, not because we
will became a feminist movement.

Of course is some way the project is politics, but free software politics
not gender identity politics, that is something completely different.


So, I don't know if I miss understand what you tried to say or not.

So please make this point more clean.

Regards.

El sáb., 12 de octubre de 2019 09:38, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) <
pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> escribió:

> On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 03:06:31PM +0200, Jean Louis wrote:
> > Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and other people who are introducing
> > their pro-feminist political views into the apolitical GNU project
> > are mixing the independent GNU project with their feminist stances.
> >
>
> Thank you for making clear arguments.  I believe there is disagreement
> with some core points.
>
> GNU projects should be feminist, because losing contributors, users
> and advocates because of toxic behavior harms free software.  This is
> not unrelated politics.  It is very important.
>
> IMHO it would be sad to lose the support of RMS who continues to do so
> much for GNU.  Endorsing RMS as the GNU Project’s leader could be seen
> as endorsing bad behavior though which harms the GNU operating system.
>
> I thank the GNU maintainers for their stance and am sorry for
> prolonging this discussion even though all arguments were already
> given somewhere before.
>
> Regards,
> Florian
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2202 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> [2019-10-12 17:45]:
> Why should GuixSD feminist?
> Free software movement is no about popularity, is about freedom.

Because Ludovic Courtès said to me so, when I asked him, that reason
for defamation of RMS is their abort() joke and Emacs Virgin jokes,
including the "MIT episodes", and you can see evidences what I am
talking about here on the Guix IRC log:
http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log and here
http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-08.log if you search for those
keywords "abort" and "virgin" or "MIT"

I agree that free software shall be for freedom, but not about freedom
for feminists, anti-fashists, fashists, nazis, or any other politics
on GNU pages but free software politics.

The Thoughtpolice Squad have their own pages to publish their
opinions.

It is not appropriate to punish RMS for Thoughtcrime on GNU.ORG domain
and GNU project shall remain apolitical to any other viewpoints but
free software points.

See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE

> If woman's come to the project should be for what we are, not because we
> will became a feminist movement.
> 
> Of course is some way the project is politics, but free software politics
> not gender identity politics, that is something completely
> different.

It should be, but it is not, due to lack of policy enforcement to
remain apolitical.

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Eric Myhre]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2269 bytes --]

Can you just... Stop?

In very simple terms.  Stop.

Your opinion, by sheer volume, is now over-represented.

If there was a rate-limit for posts on any given topic, you've exceeded it by leagues, miles, kilometers, pick a unit, you've gone too far; it's tiring.

Stop.

We acknowledge your comments; they are recorded.  If you do not have any additional detail, variation, or new thought which is to be explored... Please, for all of us: give the 'send' key a rest.


-------- Original Message --------
From: Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>
Sent: October 13, 2019 12:50:34 AM GMT+09:00
To: Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com>
Cc: Guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>, fsf-and-gnu@fsf.org, gnu-and-fsf@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

* Wilson Bustos <wrbutros@gmail.com> [2019-10-12 17:45]:
> Why should GuixSD feminist?
> Free software movement is no about popularity, is about freedom.

Because Ludovic Courtès said to me so, when I asked him, that reason
for defamation of RMS is their abort() joke and Emacs Virgin jokes,
including the "MIT episodes", and you can see evidences what I am
talking about here on the Guix IRC log:
http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log and here
http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-08.log if you search for those
keywords "abort" and "virgin" or "MIT"

I agree that free software shall be for freedom, but not about freedom
for feminists, anti-fashists, fashists, nazis, or any other politics
on GNU pages but free software politics.

The Thoughtpolice Squad have their own pages to publish their
opinions.

It is not appropriate to punish RMS for Thoughtcrime on GNU.ORG domain
and GNU project shall remain apolitical to any other viewpoints but
free software points.

See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE

> If woman's come to the project should be for what we are, not because we
> will became a feminist movement.
> 
> Of course is some way the project is politics, but free software politics
> not gender identity politics, that is something completely
> different.

It should be, but it is not, due to lack of policy enforcement to
remain apolitical.

Jean


-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3062 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Eric Myhre <hash@exultant.us> [2019-10-12 18:10]:
> Can you just... Stop?

I am hurring to stop as soon as Guix people take politics out of GNU
project from guix.gnu.org domain.

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ingo Ruhnke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 705 bytes --]

On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 3:39 PM pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) <
pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:

> GNU projects should be feminist, because losing contributors, users
> and advocates because of toxic behavior harms free software.  This is
> not unrelated politics.  It is very important.
>

This push towards thought crime policing is losing contributors right now,
it's the most toxic thing I have seen come out of the GNU project. You
can't claim inclusion and than throw people under the bus for wrong-think,
that just makes you a hypocrite. If the GNU project wants to be a project
for everybody, it needs to be a project for everybody, not just people that
agree with some variation of SJW ideology.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1009 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   Hasn't RMS already officially stepped down?  

He resigned from the FSF board, he is still Chief GNUisance.

   What position does he hold within today's GNU project other than
   being a wise old person (wise with respect to his topics of
   expertise) who is respected a lot?

While the GNU project is very loose in its organization, it is RMS who
decides what projects get accepts into the GNU project, who is or
isn't a GNU maintainer, and has the final say on anything related to
the project.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Alfred M. Szmidt <ams@gnu.org> [2019-10-12 19:13]:
>    Hasn't RMS already officially stepped down?  
> 
> He resigned from the FSF board, he is still Chief GNUisance.

That means nothing in terms of legality and policy making. Stepping
down as President of FSF means really only that FSF has different way
of management, but not different policy.

RMS is a voting member of the FSF and together with other voting
members can do many things, including to straighten the organization,
replace directors, elect new people and similar.

I have read Articles of the FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION, INC. And I have
read By-Laws and the General Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusets.

>    What position does he hold within today's GNU project other than
>    being a wise old person (wise with respect to his topics of
>    expertise) who is respected a lot?
> 
> While the GNU project is very loose in its organization, it is RMS
> who decides what projects get accepts into the GNU project, who is
> or isn't a GNU maintainer, and has the final say on anything related
> to the project.

He is currently the only one promoting free software in the world.

See from 27th August 2019:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCh8EcBrptA

See from September 4th 2019:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/

When somebody thinks of programming only, than the person does not
understand work of RMS and policy making and planning without which
there would be no FSF, no web space, no support for free software,
just nothing.

Policies for GNU projects have been already said, anybody can propose
free software to be included in GNU, follow the guidelines and make it
free for all people of the planet:
https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/index.html

Jean

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[brice]

Hello Guix,

Since the shitshow seems unstoppable at this point, allow me to add my
little crap to it. I have contributed (very) few patches to Guix and
GNU, but mean to contribute more to Guix whatever the outcome of the
drama.

First I want to thoroughly thanks Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo Wurmus and
Andy Wingo for their work on Free Software, especially Guix! Even tough
I don’t agree with their point of view on RMS nor the way they promoted
it, I acknowledge that all this fine community wouldn’t be working
together if it would haven’t been for them and their love for Free
Software.

I think you made a mistake by publishing your statement under the GNU
domain. But since it only has been a few month since the move from
guix.info to guix.gnu.org I can understand why you have published it
there. And why you may not be in a position to redacted it now, without
the perception of loosing some ground. Asking to not comment the
statement on the mailing list wasn’t a great idea neither but since
their hasn’t been any censoring, of which I’m aware, not harm has been
done.

Jean Louis would you be so kind to stop making copypasta and spam it
makes the mailing list really hard to read and discredit your point of
view – of which I am mostly in accord with. The form makes it horrible
to understand and it has probably alienated some of the readers. Putting
Jean Louis on the moderation queue would help a lot in keeping the
mailing list healthy.

Jean Louis writes:
> So NO POLITICS IN GNU PROJECT!

I’m sorry, but as a lot of thing in life, the GNU project *is*
political. However the political scope of it is well defined by all the
links your repeatedly[1] use[2].

Jens Mølgaard <jens@zete.tk> writes:
> […] Repeatedly demanding “evidence” or “facts” while ignoring and refusing to
> engage with any they are presented with.

From all of what I have read on the Guix mailing list (and a few IRC
logs), I didn’t saw any evidence/facts. Only posts[3] where people
reported their negative *feelings* when they encountered RMS. People are
responsible for their own feelings, you can’t make someone else guilty
by making you feel bad.

I would really like for someone to change my mind on RMS wrongdoing by
actually providing evidence – that is recording or text of RMS in the
act of doing something reprehensible, not a report of someone recalling
feeling bad in his presence.

I really hope the Guix project will regain it’s peace and comradery.

Godspeed to you all!

[1] <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html>
[2] <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>
[3] <http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log#175307>
--
bricewge ~ 8929 BBC5 73CD 9206 3DDD  979D 3D36 CAA0 116F 0F99

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[znavko]

Hello, Ludovic! I've choose GNU for its ideas of freedom. Freedom make this project so powerful and great.
Guix is now most perspective project, and Ludivic Courtes and other developers had made great deal on it.
I think you all will have your richness and glory but not that way.
You may organize our new community with our own new resources, structure and control. With our own power and rules.
Do you think it will be better for Guix to create new FREE COMMUNITY?
But we cannot take off somebody's rights on his own organization like GNU and so on.
znavko.

October 7, 2019 2:33 PM, "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

> Hello Guix!
> 
> We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> Project, are publishing this statement today:
> 
> https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project
> 
> We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
> but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix. (Ricardo and
> I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
> on-board.)
> 
> This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
> but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
> questions you may have. :-)
> 
> Ludo’.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[P]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 5:36 PM, <znavko@disroot.org> wrote:

> But we cannot take off somebody's rights on his own organization like GNU and so on.
> znavko.

It's not "his own organization". He can remain a contributor but he shouldn't remain any kind of chief.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Eric Brown]

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Hello Guix!
>
> We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> Project, are publishing this statement today:
>
>   https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
>
> We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
> but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.  (Ricardo and
> I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
> on-board.)
>
> This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
> but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
> questions you may have.  :-)
>
> Ludo’.

Don't know if I can add much to the volume of sentiment already
expressed, but count me among those whose financial and moral support
you have lost.

I don't know who the next "Chief GNUsance" will be, but I know how s/he
will be taken out.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[don catnip]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1202 bytes --]

Here we go again. FS community destroying itself because apparently people
cannot have opinions and discuss them like adults. Well done.

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 3:14 PM Eric Brown <brown@fastmail.com> wrote:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > Hello Guix!
> >
> > We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> > Project, are publishing this statement today:
> >
> >   https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
> >
> > We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
> > but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.  (Ricardo and
> > I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
> > on-board.)
> >
> > This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
> > but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
> > questions you may have.  :-)
> >
> > Ludo’.
>
> Don't know if I can add much to the volume of sentiment already
> expressed, but count me among those whose financial and moral support
> you have lost.
>
> I don't know who the next "Chief GNUsance" will be, but I know how s/he
> will be taken out.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1777 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1148 bytes --]

> Hello Guix!
>
> We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> Project, are publishing this statement today:
>
>    https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
>
> We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
> but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.  (Ricardo and
> I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
> on-board.)
>
> This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
> but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
> questions you may have.  :-)

Hello,

you speak about „behavior“ in that blog post. But what is more important 
is whether there are any essential, factual differences. What would you 
do differently? What is your program, your goals? Could you declare it 
clearly and honestly? Could you guarantee, that you will be faithful to 
it for decades?

Recently I wrote an article about the future of the FSF: 
<https://blog.frantovo.cz/c/377/>. Please read it and say whether you 
agree with particular items or not.

Thanks,

Franta


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1682 bytes --]

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi František, and welcome,

(I’m willing to answer questions like I wrote, but if we are to have a
more in-depth conversation, I think we should not abuse guix-devel for
that.)

František Kučera <konference@frantovo.cz> skribis:

> you speak about „behavior“ in that blog post. But what is more
> important is whether there are any essential, factual
> differences. What would you do differently? What is your program, your
> goals? Could you declare it clearly and honestly? Could you guarantee,
> that you will be faithful to it for decades?
>
> Recently I wrote an article about the future of the FSF:
> <https://blog.frantovo.cz/c/377/>. Please read it and say whether you
> agree with particular items or not.

Note that the FSF and GNU are two different things.  GNU is not a formal
organization (like US 501(c) or similar), whereas the FSF is.  The FSF
is primarily concerned with activism, whereas GNU is concerned with
making those ideas practical.

Not surprisingly, I agree with all the goals you propose for the FSF,
except perhaps one: to not ‘mix our ideas with general politics’.  I
think free software is a social movement that doesn’t exist in a vacuum,
it’s politic in nature, and thus it’s part of ‘general politics’.

Ludo’.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> [2019-10-07 17:41]:
> Hi František, and welcome,
> 
> (I’m willing to answer questions like I wrote, but if we are to have a
> more in-depth conversation, I think we should not abuse guix-devel for
> that.)

Now is too late, you are the one who abused Guix, and you should step
down and resign from Guix. You are the one who is bringing hatred and
separation in community.

GNU project is RMS's project.

Step down, resign, make your own project.

Stop destroying GNU project with money that GNU project is providing
for the Guix infrastructure.

> František Kučera <konference@frantovo.cz> skribis:
> 
> > you speak about „behavior“ in that blog post. But what is more
> > important is whether there are any essential, factual
> > differences. What would you do differently? What is your program, your
> > goals? Could you declare it clearly and honestly? Could you guarantee,
> > that you will be faithful to it for decades?
> >
> > Recently I wrote an article about the future of the FSF:
> > <https://blog.frantovo.cz/c/377/>. Please read it and say whether you
> > agree with particular items or not.
> 
> Note that the FSF and GNU are two different things.  GNU is not a formal
> organization (like US 501(c) or similar), whereas the FSF is.  The FSF
> is primarily concerned with activism, whereas GNU is concerned with
> making those ideas practical.

I see you have some legal knowledge. You should better review the
legality of the criminal act of defamation that you committed.

Your statements are pure ignorance on what you have done to GNU
project, and you are trying to change the subject. 

> Not surprisingly, I agree with all the goals you propose for the FSF,
> except perhaps one: to not ‘mix our ideas with general politics’.  I
> think free software is a social movement that doesn’t exist in a vacuum,
> it’s politic in nature, and thus it’s part of ‘general politics’.

You please RESIGN from GNU project. Move your stuff elsewhere.

Jean


I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the
GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down
and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not
deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo
Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy
Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor,
Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen,
John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian
Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John
W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate
yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable
fear of the free speech.

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[František Kučera]

Dne 10. 10. 19 v 5:45 Jean Louis napsal(a):
> * Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> [2019-10-07 17:41]:
>> Hi František, and welcome,
>>
>> (I’m willing to answer questions like I wrote, but if we are to have a
>> more in-depth conversation, I think we should not abuse guix-devel for
>> that.)
> Now is too late, you are the one who abused Guix, and you should step
> down and resign from Guix. You are the one who is bringing hatred and
> separation in community.

I basically agree with you, but I do not like the „Call-out culture“ (or
„cancel culture“).

People do mistakes, it is natural, nobody is perfect and nobody is liked
by all other people. It is much better to fix the mistakes we do rather
than remove people. In this particular case, the fix is quite simple:
remove that proclamation from the official Guix blog.

You will never find a 100% agreement with another person in all
opinions. But it's important to have a consensus in the area you want to
work with. I probably[1] have different opinion on abortions than RMS
but it is totally irrelevant. I want to cooperate with him (and others)
in the field of free software – thus the opinions on free software is
what really matters – such opinions are relevant (not opinions about
sex, politics, religion etc.).

We should not escalate these conflicts because it causes damages to all
of us. We should calm down and think what our common goals are. For me,
it is the free software <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>
defined by the four essential freedoms. **And until we can share the
code under a free software license and make the world better through
creating such free software and providing it to the public, I will call
that cooperation successful.** Regardless we might have different
opinions on other topics.

As I stated in my blog post <https://blog.frantovo.cz/c/377/>:

People are different and have various opinions on various topics. But
the pure free software ideas are a common interest which leads people
from different groups and with different backgrounds to cooperation and
shows them the way how to talk each other and eventually build a
friendly and respectful community. It is much better than if people from
different groups stay in their own bunkers and just bark at each other.

Franta

[1] honestly, I have not studied his arguments in depth; I am not
interested in such discussion; and it would be probably also
local-specific (I do not live in the USA)

Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Jean Louis]

* František Kučera <konference@frantovo.cz> [2019-10-07 17:14]:
> > Hello Guix!
> > 
> > We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> > Project, are publishing this statement today:
> > 
> >    https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
> > 
> > We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog here, for lack of a better place,
> > but OTOH the future of GNU is obviously relevant to Guix.  (Ricardo and
> > I started this initiative before Tobias, Maxim, and Marius were
> > on-board.)
> > 
> > This mailing list is maybe not the best place to discuss this in detail
> > but your local GNU maintainers will surely be happy to answer any
> > questions you may have.  :-)
> 
> Hello,
> 
> you speak about „behavior“ in that blog post. But what is more important is
> whether there are any essential, factual differences. What would you do
> differently? What is your program, your goals? Could you declare it clearly
> and honestly? Could you guarantee, that you will be faithful to it for
> decades?

They have no facts. I have and still I am asking them each
individually to provide facts, they have none.

One fact that Ludovic Courtès told me is the abort() joke, so he
thinks that is so important to defame and harass RMS. Ludovic
expressed his concerns to one other person about the Emacs Virgin joke
and something else.

Facts are here:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/

Ludovic Courtès is punishing RMS for the thoughtcrime. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

Let us face the fact that it is a hostile attempt of take over of the
GNU project.

They asked in the statement that they want to have GNU project to
which everybody can trust.

While that is absolutely impossible for any type of organization, I
cannot trust those people.

GNU project belongs to RMS. You are in his house.

Thus, me, who is nobody in GNU but free software user, I am asking
those people who are pretending to represent all of the GNU project
and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down and resign, do
your software hacking somewhere else, you do not deserve funding that
RMS is giving you. Ludovic Courtès, Ricardo Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas
Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy Wingo, Jordi Gutiérrez
Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor, Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno,
Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, John Wiegley, Tom
Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian Jackson, Tobias
Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John W. Eaton, RESIGN
and step down from GNU projects, disassociate yourself, find another
house for your excessive and uncrontollable fear of free speech.

Make your "GNG" or "GNU is NOT GNU" system elsewhere. Nobody is
forbidding you.

But please don't by hypocrite!

You are using money of the FSF to destroy GNU project on GNU project
websites! You are using money of the FSF and free software supporters
who are also supporters in the first place of the RMS who is fighting
for human rights to defame and slander RMS.

Please step down, resign, remove yourself from GNU projects, that the
disgrace finds its ends. You don't deserve GNU, make your own project
elsewhere. 

> Recently I wrote an article about the future of the FSF:
> <https://blog.frantovo.cz/c/377/>. Please read it and say whether you agree
> with particular items or not.

Your article is totally fine and good and FSF has already those
principles and policies in mind in general all what you have
written. What I cannot yet see is the enforcement of policies.

Jean


Footnotes:
[1]  https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/

Facts are here:
https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/