Hi Florian,
Am 29.03.19 um 17:24 schrieb Florian Snow:
I think there are multiple relevant factors here. We are in complete
agreement that we should not hide things. The question is, though, how
to treat them. One question is the question of privacy. I think the
person who leaves has the right to decide in which group this
resignation is discussed. In the current case here, that person decided
to send an email to multiple internal mailing lists.
I'm with you, that we have to protect the value of privacy. But if I
write an e-mail to different mailing lists, no matter how "internally"
they are, this e-mail is no longer private. If it still contains
fundamental criticism, this e-mail will reach a larger public.
It's different when you write to people directly. They should be aware
of their responsibility and their transparent handling of the criticism.
These people should address the points of the criticism and say what is
or is not. Like you did it, a more transparent dealing beforehand would
have been good.
Why was the e-mail leaked to other public lists? Because the
whistleblower fears that the FSFE will not handle the criticism
transparently, that it will be swept under the carpet.
Am 29.03.19 um 17:24 schrieb Florian Snow:
I generally don't see an issue with whistleblowing either, but it needs
a bit of context in my opinion. I do not condone simply forwarding a
private email. The base line should be at least naming the evil which
is to be revealed.
Yes, you're right, our whistleblower still has room for improvement.
Am 29.03.19 um 17:24 schrieb Florian Snow:
I think this is an important point. Where else would you like to see
information like that? There was a mailing about it and a press release
(which was suboptimal, I know). We are open to suggestions.
The FSFE is transparent in many ways, but in some the FSFE is withdrawn.
For example the current case of the EU Copyright Directive: We claim
that we spoke with representatives in Brussels and received pledges. Who
spoke with whom? When? Why? In what context? What kind of commitments
have we received? I would like to have more transparency, more regular,
detailed (monthly or quarterly) reports on our current work and more
communication with supporters, sympathisers and volunteers. Of course
this would be nice on all public mailing lists, but should at least take
place on this discussion mailing list.
Finally, FSFE is an organisation of volunteers who work for Free
Software and Open Standards. Without us, a GA with president and
vice-president, a legal team, etc. would be an end in itself. Our
purpose, however, has to be Enlightenment and to educate on what Free
Software is, why the concept was developed, and that Free Software
always refers to Free Speech.
Regards
Christian Imhorst
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
