Alfred M. Szmidt writes:

>    Of course, it is no coincidence if you have a déjà vu feeling when
>    looking at the proposed GNU Social Contract. It is intended as a
>    base for going forward with the GNU Project, but of course it takes
>    the existing into account.
> I do not see how it does anything of the sort, it is a partial summary
> of the project.  It doesn't bring anything new to the table, or moves
> anything forward, so far it is a TL;DR note...

A social contract is only a necessity in a community-run organization
because it helps prevent the organization from moving off-course.  When
the moral compass of the organization is set and maintained by a leader
or group of leaders, then it is completely unnecessary.  If you believe
GNU should be community-run, then you'll want to see a social contract;
if you think it should be run as it currently is, then it's impossible
to see a use for it.

Given that nothing has changed in how GNU is being run, it appears that
the cart is being placed well before the horse.  However, I would be
shocked if they didn't already expect rms not to step down and therefore
to reject their Social Contract out-of-hand.  Given that it is
nevertheless still being written (in public) under conditions where it
will be rejected with almost certainty, I wouldn't be surprised if they
are in fact counting on this to happen.  That would give another
opportunity to publicly shame rms and the GNU project as it actually is:
"Look at this beautiful document that rms refused to implement for GNU!
The fact that he *disagrees* with these points shows that he is not fit
to lead GNU anymore!".  Nevermind that the rejection is due to its utter
superfluousness given the structure of the GNU project and is not due to
disagreement with the contents.

With that said, I am fully in support of having a couple of succinct
documents that describe the structure and mission of the GNU project.
Richard has also expressed interest in that.  I just don't see any need
of enacting them as the basis of a formal pledge.


Reply via email to