> This 'we' that you are talking about is excluding people that are
   > capable of making decisions, something you seem to not care about.
   > You're not in a position to decide what the GNU project is, or how it
   > should be managed.  So please leave it to RMS, the GAC, etc. instead.
   > This is not how you make decisions, or drive a fruitful decision
   > making process.

   Nobody is excluded, all GNU maintainers and developers are welcome to
   discuss these GNU governance issues here. 

That is clearly false.  I've asked repeatedly if for example RMS, the
person who can actually decide on topics like governance, is included
in these discussions -- this has been answered with abundant silence.
This shows a lack of understanding, and a total disregard for how this
project is governed.  You've repeatedly made the assumption that this
is a community driven project, and that volunteers have a deciding
factor, this is clearly false.

The GNU project is not democratic, for good reasons, and this isn't
complicated at all to understand.  Asking for a loyalty pledge would
be a radical change to how things are done, which now has gone from
that the GNU project makes a pledge to individual members (see your
message, and Ludovic').  You can't even seem to agree on what this
summary is supposed to say, or mean.

All in all, this should first be discussed with RMS before brought to
public discourse.

Reply via email to