* Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@gnu.org> [2019-10-28 20:24]: > Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 18:06:35 +0530, a ecrit: > > Social Contract is now being discussed as something as adopted. I > > do not see it is adopted. > > Nobody said it was adopted. Nobody even said such a thing would have > to be called social contract. Nobody said it had to be written by > a small group of people and be imposed on everybody. Some discussion > happens here, but it doesn't intends to impose anything.
Sorry, but your statement sounds to me like Doublespeak. First one thing, now other thing, I don't have any good feeling with that. Say what you say, but you have contradictory statements. Personally, I have nothing against you. I just speak for facts to be known and for information to be transparent. "Social Contract" is bad for GNU project. I have stated the facts before. I really hope that "We Shall Force them to be Free." by Rousseau's does not impact GNU project. I could clearly see where it goes, few people proposing it, and then discussing about the text of "social contract" before there was any kind of "adoption". Now I get told that "nobody mentioned" it. In that sense, when few people already speak of the text of "Social Contract" that appears as implying that "social contract" has been adopted. Thus nobody need to say that. Implication is there and pretty clear. See the list. That such thing would need to be called "social contract" was said on this list. Nobody said that it has to be written by a small group people, but that is exactly happening so, by the very definition of "social contract", it is coerced fictional "contract" and it is written by small group of people. It started on this list. Now you say it did not start, nobody started talking about "social contract" on this list. Huahahahhahahaha. How contradictory is that! I am referencing to the take-over attempts by group of social justice warriors, see https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Ludovic-Court%C3%A8s-Guix-is-accusing-Stallman-of-Thoughtcrime-on-his-own-domain-GNU-org.html who are so much convinced that their cause is "just", without verification of facts, and who now ask for "social contract". The agenda is written on their page, it is in the IRC logs and various rumors going on. They wish to control GNU project so that GNU project complies to various whatever-they-wish politics that are beyond GNU project's goals and purposes. The proposal about "social contract" is the next step, next attempt of take over of the GNU project. GNU project is welcoming EVERYBODY who wish to contribute to promotion and application of free software philosophy and whoever wish to propose new GNU software projects. GNU project does not discriminate by gender, or other classes, neither verifies genders of contributors, or their classes, as everybody is welcome to contribute and I am sure that people can even use pseudonyms when contributing, so that their gender cannot be recognized by their names. That is what I know. That is what is stated on FSF and GNU.org web pages. No need for "social contract" in GNU project. I have guts feeling on why there is proposal for "social contract" here, as it is clear by the propaganda that is going on the Guix pages by the very Guix leader Ludovic Courtès jointly with few others of the Thoughtpolice Squad. The way to go by your group of defamers is to start with the "social contract" and then to continue publicly defaming Stallman or whoever that group of Social Justice Warriors wish to defame and slander. "Social Contract" would be such a nice tool to impose what other people shall think and what political views shall their express privately, or otherwise they would be forbidden. You would have tool for better Thoughtpolicing. I am sorry, that is what I feel. I feel that only reason why is "social contract" mentioned is to make rules to justify their defamation and slander of Dr. Richard Stallman and continue doing so. That is my feeling. It kind of speaks clearly to me... my guts, you know? But what is going on here with the group of people that are trying to take over control of GNU project, for reasons of radical feminism. That is what Ludovic Courtès told me on IRC when I asked him to give me some facts. You Samuel Thibault you have signed and stated that defamation and slander of Dr. Richard Stallman on: https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ How about you explain Samuel, to me, I am curious, why did you make a statement on "GNU Project" when statement is about Dr. Richard Stallman? Or you will say "nobody said that"? Sure you can say that, but it does not make you trusted, you have no argument. Tell me simply the fact that PROVES 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 ONE FACT? You are defaming founder of GNU project. Could you please give some facts, give some weight to that? Is it abort() joke? Emacs Virgin joke? MIT episode? What is it? His thoughts? Opinions? I can say, there is one fact: RMS did not do anything illegal. I can also say that defamation and slander is illegal in France. That is also fact. And I can say that there is one big bunch of tolerance in GNU project community towards you and others. A privilege that you do not appreciate. Would there be a "social contract" now, you would be expelled right away. Don't you realize it? Let us hope that no such thing as "social contract" in the future of GNU does not come to its existence. > > It is wrong in its definition, from its definition of the term > > social contract. > > > > The term takes its name from The Social Contract > > I don't think it does, I have never seen any reference to that in > anything talking about the Debian Social Contract, and not in the > 1997 discussions leading to it either. Actually it took me a bit of > time to even just realize what reference you were talking about > (even if I am French and know about Rousseau's work). If we had to > abandon anything that has the same title as something else in the > world, we would run out of words. You can think what you wish. You can see clouds and think apples. Nobody forbids you thinking whatever you wish. GNU Project is not run by same principles as Debian GNU/Linux. There is absolutely nothing to be compared to. Words ARE important. That is how you submit message to other party. If you use the term "social contract" then it has its etymology and background and history. That cannot be ignored. Nobody needs to reference it in the Debian, there are books, encyclopedias, there is Rousseau, thus using the term implies you are using the term with its history and etymology in its meanings. It becomes derived from its previous meanings. You can say it is not, when it is, you can confuse others or be confused, but you cannot change facts of the etymology for the term "social contract". In general any introduction of "social contract" into GNU project is introduction of "political philosophy" that is, IMHO, "other politics" that shall not and need not be part of GNU project. It is successful, evidently, without any kind of "social contract". Your attempts to take-over are futile. Ludovic Courtès's and Samuel Thibault's defamatory statement on https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ to take over the GNU project are futile. So far it is so. But, please, you keep trying for entertainment purposes and more transparency. I love you people. For as long as there is GNU project and free software there will be jokes and entertainment. I would prefer an attorney rather from some country which values freedom and free speach more than France as France is not in the first top five in the world. But French attorney or legal advisor could give you better explanation of what "social contract" means. > Anyway, once more nobody said such a thing had to be called that > way, it was just a way to refer to something that has been used in > another project, and not meaning it would have to be implemented the > same in the GNU project. Thank you. Well said, it is "other" project. GNU came first. Not Debian. Debian does not define the GNU project. It is more other way around. I understand how you think that "nobody said such a thing had to be called that way" where you are referencing the term "social contract", but that term I have found in this mailing list. Who exactly said is not of my concern, everybody shall speak what they wish, but that it was said cannot be disputed, as there is archive for this list. Let me state again my opinion of GNU project and welcoming ANY FEMALE OR MALE, as that is exactly the problem here, the problem that nobody is speaking of except one time when Ludovic Courtès mentioned it to me on IRC Guix chat. Problem is that few people here, like you and Ludovic and others think that GNU project is not welcoming females. Right? abort() joke is a joke, it has nothing really with welcoming or not welcoming. Emacs Virgin joke is a joke, and it is successful joke that is presented to multiple audiences throughout the world. I could see all people laughing. See here: https://youtu.be/yCh8EcBrptA?t=6913 and observe people laughing. Are we now to expect religious zealots to come over to GNU and say how "Richard Stallman" is making fun out of their Jesus, or put here any other deity, and for that reason he shall step down? Can you hear people giggling? You want to take down Richard for reason that we have "Church of Emacs"? Hahahhhahaa. That he said we have saints? Or that he mentioned Emacs Virgins? Come on people, calm down, if you don't like the joke, don't laugh, but don't say it is not a joke. People laugh. Don't bash Richard for jokes, it is appears stupid and immature. Please don't introduce "social contract" for reason that one defamation page written by Ludovic Courtès and other members of the Thoughtpolice Squad have been inflated by media that we need "social contract". We don't. The page is defamation, fact-less statement, not well written anyway, it hurts Ludovic, it hurts Guix, it hurts GNU. It is piece of crap. You wish to promote feminist agenda? You are welcome. But setup your website somewhere else. Not on Guix, not on GNU, not on GNU project. Stallman did it on www.stallman.org -- and I remember back in time his opinions were on GNU.ORG, I remember well, because I was myself confused why is some other subject but free software published on GNU.ORG, over the time, all personal opinions were transferred to stallman.org and it must be done so as FSF is the non-profit organization and he cannot speak on FSF websites and favor any politician, or tax-free status could be in danger. That is US law. That is why he keeps his opinions on www.stallman.org I really welcome everybody to invite women or whoever gender one identifies with, into the GNU project, but GNU project is not there for gender diversity, it is there to make a free operating system. On August 18th 2019, I have asked professor Tanenbaum, maker of Minix operating system, which inspired Linus Torvalds to make the "Linux" kernel, why there is less interest at female population to computer science. Please ask him yourself, verify the facts. He said that they tried hard to attract females, but it hasn't worked so far. He explained to me that at the age of 3 girls are told they can be mommies and nurses and teachers. Computer programmer is not in the list. Thus, there are many various reasons for lack of gender diversity, but GNU project is not about gender diversity, fight for your causes, but find appropriate group somewhere else, as GNU is about free operating system. GNU project is welcoming EVERYBODY who wish to contribute to promotion and application of free software philosophy and whoever wish to propose new GNU software projects. I have not get other feeling in last 20 years of using GNU software and observing GNU contributors. I have not participated much, but I have got feeling of very welcoming and friendly community. I can see that nonsense is written about GNU project, such as this one: https://osf.io/2tre8/download by Camille Akmut, October 4th, 2019. I cannot see any "facts". That she is making lists of people who are female or male based on their names is sad situation for me. I feel sorry for that person as she finds it "stressful" and "being offended" that there are more males then females in GNU project. But GNU project does not look into person's gender when person is applying or proposing a GNU project. However, everybody is free to open up GNU Computer Club where one can promote or impose that equal number of females and males shall be in such club. I would not do that, I would simply be welcoming. Camille Akmut writes: "GNU is not for women – such would be the conclusion of anyone going through our statistics." -- but that is not a policy, not a fact, not discrimination, that is the feeling of Camille Akmut, she feels "offended" because she was verifying who is male and who is female?! Sure people can do all kind of analysis as they wish, but that is not useful, does not contribute to society, and it is not free software philosophy. Accusing "GNU project" for jokes is ridiculous. Accusing GNU project for reasons of who has penis and who not, and how less penises would be better for free software is funny. I don't know how it influences the software, it just looks funny to me. And again: GNU project is for everybody, there is absolutely no policy on discrimination against everybody. And what somebody does in their private lives does not matter to GNU project. Those other politics and movements are dividing GNU project, but they are not contributing to it by spreading free software philosophy. Please don't act by rumors. Value friendship and what we have in common. Remove that defamation, it is not worth yourself, not worth for your life. What are you getting from it? Just accusing Stallman and being "proud"? I have no idea what benefit you or anybody else is getting by that defamation. Jean Louis
