* Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> [2020-01-06 20:35]: > On Mon 06 Jan 2020 15:05, Brandon Invergo <bran...@gnu.org> writes: > > > Ludovic Courtès writes: > > > >> As a side note: I think authority is not something one should take for > >> granted. We’re a group of volunteers, and each one of us has just as > >> much authority as the others consent to give them. > > > > No. When you join an organization, you implicitly or explicitly agree > > to work within the existing structure of that organization. > > No. (Isn't a lovely discursive pattern? Sheesh.) > > More seriously, I think that when you join an organization, you > implicitly or explicitly agree to work for the *goals* of that > organization. > > At any given time, the strategy that an organization takes may no longer > correspond to its goals. In that case it is the responsibility of the > members of the organization to change it to better fit its needs.
Let us put down those generalizations about "strategy that GNU organization takes" and be specific. Which specific strategy did GNU project take that no longer correspond to its goals? Be specific, stop accusations, provide facts. For any organization, if you think it is bad or good, it does not matter, if it is not yours, volunteers have no final say, it is GNU founder who has finaly say, please remember on www.stallman.org it is written "I continue to be the Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project. I do not intend to stop any time soon." GNU is not yours, volunteers have no final say, it is so in majority of software projects, nothing wrong about that. Can you please have some respect for doctor Stallman? > I am not sure why you think that a literal argument from authority will > succeed in convincing those GNU developers and maintainers that think a > different governance structure is a better strategy. You have all the freedom to think anything. Yet, without consulting with the GNU founder, Dr. Richard Stallman, your behavior is disrespectful. Jean
