On 2019-09-30 04:42 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 30/09/2019 22:20, Brendan Kidwell wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019, at 16:08, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 30/09/2019 21:53, Brendan Kidwell wrote:
To be clear: I have no personal conflict with you right now over
politics and I have no ongoing protocol issues relating to MY email
addresses, but please understand that breaking protocol in email or
anywhere else is not a good way to win friends.
Last Monday, John Sullivan, the FSF Executive Director posted a nasty
put-down on the libreplanet-discuss list, maliciously misquoting[1]
what
I wrote and minimizing my concerns. Has anybody seen other examples
of
misquoting recently?
When I attempted to reply, he censored me from posting any further
replies on the libreplanet-discuss list. How many other people are
censored there too?
Ultimately, libreplanet-discuss is a channel that is the property of
FSF. Some staff member or committee at FSF sets the rules and makes
final judgment on what is or isn't allowed on this email list.
FSF explicitly uses the phrase "free as in speech" to explain[1] their
philosophy. People who donate time or money to FSF may be curious to
find that "free as in speech" is not so free. Censorship effectively
deceives people by creating a distorted perception of what other
community members have to say.
Different people also have different perspectives on the term
"property". After all, if we all contribute, either directly or
indirectly then many people would feel no guilt about using those
channels or communicating with people they met through those channels.
When you write "property", you conjure up images of tangible property.
If somebody steals Mr Sullivan's mouse, it will be harder for him to
use
his computer. But if volunteers work around censorship, they are not
preventing other people from doing something.
You can't steal something intangible, you can only duplicate or copy it.
It's not theft because nobody has been deprived of anything. Copyright
and similar artificial creations of that nature are not really analogous
to actual property. There are some circumstances where knowledge may
enable you to control information such as where there is a private key
such as with cryptocurrencies. That might be one of the atypical
examples where the analogy sort of works a little bit better. The FSF
controls its mailing list servers (and physical property), but it
doesn't control what others do with the information (email addresses)
after that.
I don't respond well to misleading email headers unless I'm in a
curious mood or some other good mood.
How many people detected email header shenanigans and privately
blacklisted every domain you use?
We know that hundreds of people simply quit FSFE after being shunted
into the Supporter program without consent. Some people will be
quitting FSF after the RMS lynching too.
Yes- and if you listen to Free Talk Live Ian Freeman announced he would
be doing just that with his FSF associate membership live on air to 200+
radio stations and god only knows how many listeners.
I don't think the answer to the problem is to discontinue your
membership, but I do like the idea of a competing organization that is
more in tune with the ideologies expressed and beyond. The FSF has been
co-opted by people on the left to do things it shouldn't be doing. RMS
has always ensured it was a fairly neutral organization specific to
software freedom where all were welcome. The software freedom
conservancy and select other people in the community have been working
to change that. I'm friendly with people on the left, but I'm not
forgiving of there efforts to co-opt the organization for unrelated
social agendas of the left.
It is one thing for Bradley Kuhn and Karen Sandler to go in that
direction with there own organizations if that is what they want to do,
but it's wrong for those that have attempted to co-opt an organization
founded by another.
The people who blacklist a domain are mostly people who ignored that
exodus and pretend everything is OK in a bubble that is getting smaller
and smaller.
Maybe you should use other channels that are less centrally
controlled, to call out censorship. It's a lot of work, but it's the
clean way to do it.
There are cleaner solutions in the pipeline.
In the meantime, if something is critical, I personally welcome a BCC
from anybody who has no other way to share it.
Same here.
Regards,
Daniel
1. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
