Re: police report against the petition mob
On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 00:53:45 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: > If you feel the same pain watching the attacks on RMS that you felt > watching the mob at the US Capitol then you are a witness to a crime. > > https://debian.community/molly-de-blanc-arrest-and-prosecution-for-cyberbullying/ Calling for the arrest of someone whose speech you do not agree with, even if you consider it libelous, is wrong. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: planned downtime for ci.guix.gnu.org this Friday
On Sat, Mar 07, 2020 at 20:00:27 -0500, aviva wrote: > On 3/7/20 7:26 AM, Hartmut Goebel wrote: >> Am 06.03.20 um 17:33 schrieb aviva: >>> It is too bad that it continues to have that post assualting Richard >>> Stallman's crditbility. You would help your project a great deal to >>> remove that from your blog. >> This statement is unrelated to the thread topic. Also this has been >> discussed in length already. So please stop trolling. >> > > > Have some respect for people older than you and with a great more deal > of expereince, and try not to be rude. > > I've been on mailing lists since the early 1970's, so I am not ignorant > of what is a troll and what is not. This issue has also been discussed at length on this list. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Shannon Dosemagen and the FSF
On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 19:56:21 -0500, aviva wrote: > I wanted to voice my concern about the direction the the Free Software > Foundation has recently taken. It seems that it has, with out warrant, > moved past its initial mandate and adapting a more radicalized political > stance that drives away large segments of the population from the > mission of promoting Free Software. > > > Recently, the FSF has announced having Shannon Dosemagen as a keynote > speaker at libreplanet. This may be better raised at libreplanet-disc...@gnu.org: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: feeling intimidated for endorsing the GNU social contract
On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 00:38:25 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: >> Moderation of this list was taken over because moderators were supposed >> to have been appointed by GNU leadership. That was a procedural error, >> which was no fault of your own and I apologize for, and has since been >> addressed so that it doesn't happen again. > > Which is a funny meta-discussion when the list is used to define what > "GNU leadership" means :) Yes, my phrasing was intentional. I understand that you disagree with and want to change how GNU is governed, but refusing to acknowledge the current leadership doesn't change what it is. >> > The FSF keeps ignoring our calls for a neutral discussion space. >> >> The FSF is not involved in GNU governance, so why should they provide >> such a thing? > > Of course the FSF is involved in GNU governance. They raise money in > the name of GNU, we assign copyright to the FSF, they hold all our > assets, and they keep lists of people who may use those resources for > which purposes. The FSF is the legal entity which runs GNU. We should > coordinate governance issues with the FSF. There are lots of issues > which are the shared responsibility of GNU volunteers and the > FSF. After discussions on this list we sent various of those issues to > the FSF so we can better coordinate: > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-12/msg00026.html We're talking past one-another, which is unfortunate, because it makes it difficult to have constructive conversation. I do hope that in the near future the FSF will make a direct and unambiguous statement on this matter, because I don't see any other way to resolve this dispute. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 08:58:18 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: > The PsyOps techniques that large free software communities are now using > against volunteers, minimising people's views, misquoting/gaslighting, > scapegoating, shaming and emotional blackmail do as much harm or more > than physical violence. I responded in private with some of my thoughts on your position. My recommendation is to use less extreme and hyperbolic comparisons when conveying strong disagreements. If you consider these topics to represent instruments of suppression, you can say so in very different terms that can be discussed in kind and constructive ways. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: GNU/Guix
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 18:44:39 -0800, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote: > Courtès then makes a bizarre reply to Stallman: [...] > When Stallman, a native English speaker, brilliant hacker and > cogent thinker starts off a sentence with "It implies this > is ...", and you think that "This is not true" is a suitable > reply, maybe you should think again. People are free to discuss disagreements and differences in opinion. This suggests that such freedom shouldn't be afforded, and makes unfair judgments against Ludo. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: feeling intimidated for endorsing the GNU social contract
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 14:59:46 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > I am very sorry for this. And I apologize because I was one of the > people who suggested people discuss things on this list. And I was one > of the original moderators of this list till Mike and Brandon decided > they wanted to do moderation on their own without my and Carlos help > [*]. In hindsight suggesting this list was a terrible recommendation > and I realize now that I put some people, who just wanted to discuss > what they love about being GNU, through a lot of pain. I am very sorry > for that. I am certainly not recommending people make themselves a > target by publicly posting to this list anymore. Firstly, I want to reiterate that the unwelcoming and unkind behavior on this list is not acceptable. Many of us within GNU, including myself, strongly recommended against use of this or any public list for these discussions, which I feel should be happening internally. But despite that disagreement, you should be able to hold these discussions without harassment. Moderation of this list was taken over because moderators were supposed to have been appointed by GNU leadership. That was a procedural error, which was no fault of your own and I apologize for, and has since been addressed so that it doesn't happen again. > I have heard from various people they felt intimidated both by > reactions on the list, some by fellow GNU participants and from > outsiders sending them some of the most offensive email they ever > received. Some contain direct personal threats, extremely racist or > sexist language and even antisemitic views (luckily most of the worst > ones aren't posted to the list, but there have certainly also been > implicitly/implied threats and racist or sexist views posted on this > list). I'm ashamed that GNU lists have been host to such garbage. > The FSF keeps ignoring our calls for a neutral discussion space. The FSF is not involved in GNU governance, so why should they provide such a thing? GNU has also rejected creating such a list. If the FSF were to provide a list for discussing GNU governance, that would not only be overstepping, but it'd be in defiance of GNU. > And I think it is unacceptable that people are afraid to publicly > discuss why they participate in GNU because they feel intimidated and > fear to get personal threats or have to endure racist or sexist > language. IMHO the FSF really has a responsibility to the GNU > volunteers to be able to work and communicate with each other without > having to feel harassed all the time. And I have recently withdrawn > most of my funding to them because they are not taking this > responsibility seriously. The FSF has no such responsibility. They provide infastructure. They are responsible for _their own_ lists and other forums. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 22:26:27 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: > It took me a few days, but I finally came up with a concise summary of > the situation: > > https://fsfellowship.eu/what-is-a-safe-space/ I am ashamed to have "free software" appear on this page and for anyone to believe I or anyone else here may be affiliated with such an extremist and horrific perspective. How dare you equate the ongoing discussion with the slaughter of people. This is not welcome on this list. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] * Scraping email addresses from a public list" * : What about using bcc to prevent "scraping" email addresses ?
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 14:07:42 +, Mancini, Sabin (DFS) wrote: > Mike, > What about using bcc to prevent "scraping" email addresses ? All mail sent to the list would have to be hidden behind fake addresses generated by the mailing list. I'm not sure what the capabilities of Mailman are, but would cause breakages in many other ways for people. What is being done is unacceptable, but I don't want one bad actor to cause drastic changes. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: ru...@mrbrklyn.com: Please remove me from your hang...@nylxs.com or vill...@mrbrklyn.com mailing lists
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 19:34:07 -0600, J.B. Nicholson wrote: > Alexandre François Garreau wrote: >> It was, and it is not “tolerated”, this is bad faith: it is simply >> impossible to do anything about that. > > gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org list owners could remove ru...@mrbrklyn.com from > the list and make it clear that he won't be allowed back until he has > stopped sending unsolicited email to those who don't want it. > > I'm not saying I recommend this or don't recommend this reaction, frankly > it's not my decision to make as I don't own gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org. I > bring this up to point out that it goes too far to say "it is simply > impossible to do anything about that". There is something that can be > done. Apparently gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org owners have chosen to do nothing > about it and therefore it is fair to say that ru...@mrbrklyn.com's behavior > is tolerated. Here we have the perfect example of why one shouldn't judge the moderators harshly without any information. I've publicly told Ruben to stop. Instead, this user has created multiple accounts and spams this list incessantly. A ban would do nothing. I personally reject far more messages from this person that I approve, and there are dozens a day. And because of this "censorship" we impose, Ruben has take it upon himself to create a separate "Hangout" mailing list to which he forwards all messages---including some _private messages_ between him and others. He forcefully subscribed people to this list, and does not honor unsubscription requests. A ban does nothing to help this situation. Indeed, the moderation we did choose to do has resulted in an angry reaction that has only inflamed the situation further. One again, I ask that people please assume that moderators are acting in good faith. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: feeling intimidated for endorsing the GNU social contract
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 21:13:48 +0100, Andy Wingo wrote: >> We've had a few people in particular that have been especially >> problematic, and one person in particular that has many different >> aliases and has even gone so far as to create a separate list that the >> person has forcefully subscribed people to. I condemn this >> behavior. But there's little we can do to stop it. > > I am very sorry, but this is simply not true. There is noting we can do to stop someone from scraping email addresses from a public list and subscribing those users to another list. That is what I was referring to. > The best solution to the problem is a public mailing list whose > subscribers are limited to GNU stakeholders. This would go a long way > towards discourse civility, and is what was asked for in the beginning; > you have the power to do such a thing. I do not have the power to do such a thing. That is beyond the authority granted to me. > It is possible to ban people who have a pattern of problematic behavior. > It too would go a long way to solving this problem. You have the power > to do this, also. > > It is possible to be more vigorous in moderating. You and Brendan took > it upon yourselves the task of moderating this list, so this also is > within your power. Moderators of this list have offered their time to work within certain guidelines. > And yet for some reason you used this power to let the message > referred to in > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2020-02/msg00441.html > go through. To be clear: you're saying that I personally used my "power" to personally approve a racist message to this list? What an absurd accusation. I just got done condemning someone for calling another person "sick", which is far less offensive. Just because a message makes it to this list does not mean that it was approved. Not every message going to this list is moderated. Before reading this accusation of yours, I read a private message from another person offering his/her time to help moderate this list, wondering how such a message got through, and it's being investigated. Do you not assume that we're acting in good faith? You know quite well that GNU is a project of volunteers. And I can assure you that I'd rather not be spending my time babysitting this list. Messages like this do not help matters any. I would not have approved that message if it was presented to me in a moderation queue. > In a message to Andreas Enge > (https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2020-02/msg00433.html), > you write: > >> But coming to this list, raising an inflammatory topic, and then >> demanding that moderation be used as a tool to reduce tensions is not >> acceptable either. > > Here you have chosen instead to blame the recipients of harassment for > the harassment that they have received: it says "you deserve it", in > pretty much those words. Once again you accuse me of something I have not done, this time by deliberately twisting my words, in plain sight nonetheless. I did not say "you deserve it", or even imply such a thing. The moderators do not cater to individuals' expectations. I would hope that one would consider that to be a good thing, since you wouldn't want us to cater to the expectations of those you disagree with. I have made strong efforts to be a neutral party throughout all of this, but I will not tolerate attempts to smear my or other volunteers' efforts. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Harrassment on this list
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 07:07:11 +, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > I'm not on this list to see a do-nothing guy foment all day and night > filling up my inbox. Ruben: If you want to sue, sue. You're a Jew, you know > lots of lawyers. Stop fomenting and keveching and just file your suit. This racist language is not acceptable on this list. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: feeling intimidated for endorsing the GNU social contract
Mark: On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 11:36:16 -0700, Mark Galassi wrote: > I wrote to endorse the GNU social contract and received an email which > made me feel insulted and intimidated (this one said "F*** you", so not > much risk of misinterpreting the language). I also got a sequence of > replied from people telling me I was wrong to do so. These seem to be > canned replies that are sent to other people who endorse it. They did > not make me feel as intimidated, but it still seems like a strange > campaign. Firstly: I'm sorry that you are receiving those messages. People should not feel harassed in that way when communicating on GNU lists. Unfortunately, though, as Alfred has mentioned, there's nothing we can do to prevent people from contacting you privately. But if you do receive a message privately which has also been CC'd to this list, and find that it does not appear in the list archives, then you at least know that the moderators have attempted to mitigate some of the damage by preventing it from reaching the list. We've had a few people in particular that have been especially problematic, and one person in particular that has many different aliases and has even gone so far as to create a separate list that the person has forcefully subscribed people to. I condemn this behavior. But there's little we can do to stop it. > I wrote the following to the list last week but it got rejected by > moderation for being "off topic". Since this list seems to have a lot > of traffic which is a soul-search on how we should interact, I think it > must have been rejected by mistake by an overworked moderator, which is > understandable. I appreciate your perspective. Considering that I see no problem with this message, I'll assume that your interpretation is correct. > I don't see clear information about moderation, and don't know right now > how to write to the moderators directly (the page > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss doesn't give > moderator addresses). I'm the publicly listed owner of the list. While I don't frequently moderate, please feel free to get in touch with me directly. I've been more active the past few days, but even when I'm not, I'll see direct messages to me. > I would suggest that the moderators of this list set something up to > avoid the trolling. Even if they block such a response to the whole > list, it still goes directly to the person posting. Some weird other > addresses were also added. We're doing the best we can, but only so much is within our means. Certain people have caused us a substantial moderation burden. > I won't post the person's name here, but moderators: if you want I can > share the details with you directly. Email me directly if you would > like to work on this and need my help. Feel free to forward me any details and we can see if it's anything we're not already aware of. Happy hacking. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 08:50:44 -0800, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote: > On 2020-02-22 19:38, Mike Gerwitz wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 20:48:43 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote: >>> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:26:22AM -0800, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) >>> wrote: >>>> On 2020-02-22 01:22, Andreas Enge wrote: >>>> > And another ad-hominem attack. Can you substantiate the claim of us >>>> > being >>>> > powermongers? >>>> >>>> https://wiki.gnu.tools/wiki:code-of-conduct >>>> "Enforcement", "Ban", "Correction", "Warning" >>>> You are sick. >>> >>> Could I kindly ask for this person to be put on moderation? I find it >>> difficult to interpret the last statement as anything but a gratuitous >>> insult >>> (following a message that was not even directed at them). Notice that >>> there >>> is a pattern of overly aggressive messages by Kaz Kylheku. >> >> I think we can handle this without having to resort to blocking a >> person's messages. >> >> Kaz, please avoid use of subjective terms like "powermonger" and focus > > Everything you see here has passed moderation. > > If you don't think I should be able to include quotes of someone > else's text that contains "powermonger", take it up with the moderator. I'm very sorry---I meant to reply to the "you are sick". I was considering multiple moderation messages at once and they somehow got mixed. I am one of the moderators on this list. >> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html > > I think that is useful for communication within projects themselves. > I don't think that should be blindly followed in a self-defeating way > by remaining meek when the project is under attack. The guidelines do not say "be kind unless ...". -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Harrassment on this list
On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 21:21:18 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote: > The reason I have been insisting is that inaction towards this kind of > behaviour kills communication in the GNU project - if victims of verbal > abuse are expected to change their opinions to stop the name calling, > or are invited to be less susceptible, they will eventually just leave, > and their example will prevent others from joining. And as has been amply > demonstrated, just brandishing guidelines without options for sanctions > does not solve the problem. Personal attacks and unkind communication are not acceptable. They should be denounced and can be moderated as a last resort. But please understand the situation that we have been put in. The topics discussed here are extremely controversial. It's all too easy for people to be offended by one-another, or to interpret one-another's words especially harshly. If one particular group of people is behaving more kindly than others, then that is good---that group is acting as the better example for kind communication. Others acting unkindly, even if they feel as though they are defending GNU, are in the wrong. But coming to this list, raising an inflammatory topic, and then demanding that moderation be used as a tool to reduce tensions is not acceptable either. We'll strike a balance. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 14:35:56 -0800, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) wrote: > On 2020-02-22 18:58, Amin Bandali wrote: >> "Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss)" <936-846-2...@kylheku.com> writes: >> >> [...] >>> >>> You are sick. >> >> I urge you to consider the GNU Kind Communications Guidelines [0] when >> posting to GNU lists, as well as keeping this list's guidelines [1] in >> mind when posting here. > > I sincerely believe that the code of conduct document published > on the gnu.tools is the product of a sick mind. > > Make no mistake: this is not name-calling; I stand by it. To approach this from a constructive perspective: rather than claiming someone to be "sick", state your opinion of the symptoms, and debate those. But more importantly, and taking precedence: it's irrelevant to the discussion. Whether or not you believe someone to be "sick" because they hold a particular viewpoint---which I find to be a terrible mistake---doesn't matter to the topic at hand. Consequently, raising it could only be interpreted as an insult, since it can do nothing to further a constructive debate. So as a moderator, I'm asking that you please stop. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 20:48:43 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote: > On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:26:22AM -0800, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) > wrote: >> On 2020-02-22 01:22, Andreas Enge wrote: >> > And another ad-hominem attack. Can you substantiate the claim of us >> > being >> > powermongers? >> >> https://wiki.gnu.tools/wiki:code-of-conduct >> "Enforcement", "Ban", "Correction", "Warning" >> You are sick. > > Could I kindly ask for this person to be put on moderation? I find it > difficult to interpret the last statement as anything but a gratuitous insult > (following a message that was not even directed at them). Notice that there > is a pattern of overly aggressive messages by Kaz Kylheku. I think we can handle this without having to resort to blocking a person's messages. Kaz, please avoid use of subjective terms like "powermonger" and focus on facts that can be debated effectively. We ask that you also refer to the kind communication guidelines and avoid insults---they do not add to constructive discussion and only serve to further inflame existing tensions. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html > If anything, this message shows how much a code of conduct is needed. The very nature of this list, and the topics that have been presented on it, invite strong emotions and criticisms. We're not moderating patch discussions where it's much easier to draw the lines. While people do not always choose language that is kind, we should try our best to handle it through constructive discussion before resorting to harsh actions. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 07:29:45 +, Alex Taylor wrote: > Finally "endorsing" the text would give the rebel group a legitimacy which > they neither have, nor deserve. It's instructive to look at the track > record of these renegades. The Guile and Guix projects have both excluded > and/or vilified people who disagree with the people in power (the same > people who push the "social contract").If you choose to endorse this > text, bear in mind that the words are imprecise so don't be surprised if, > sometime down the road, your endorsement is used as a weapon against you > when you fall out of favor with the powermongers. While it's fine to disagree with a particular strategy for a group of people, please avoid overly subjective and hyperbolic terms like "powermonger"---it does not add anything constructive to already inflamed discussion. Let's try to stick with stating facts, which can be concretely debated effectively. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why the "social contract" should not be endorsed
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 18:41:48 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > PS: It’s telling that yet another insulting message passed moderation! Insults deserve condemnation, not censorship. "Insulting" is highly subjective, and a slippery slope for blocking messages. I've personally prevented many dozens of messages from reaching this list, and I seldom moderate myself. But not before having made an attempt to (publicly) stop the behavior. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Moderation
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 17:25:38 +0100, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > Indeed, given the toxicity on this list, I had presumed there was no > moderation (any more). If it is that modereration is being applied, it is > either sorely deficient, or an indication of the language that GNU permits > (in spite of the 'kind communication' document). Which is a good > demonstration of why people might not find it a welcoming organization. It is worth reminding that readers of this list cannot see the number and type of messages being rejected (and so cannot judge what moderation is being done), and that this moderation is being done by volunteers on their own time. It is also worth reminding that it is not possible to make all parties happy. Indeed, moderators get verbal lashings from all sides. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: about the GNU promise
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 16:32:53 -0500, nylxs wrote: > On 2/6/20 5:36 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> The goal is to acknowledge that GNU is not the only free software >> provider, and that the GNU Project (socially) and the GNU System >> (technically) has to work with these other free software projects. > > > That is because you fail to understand the importance of Free Software, > because honestly, you are so corrupt and greedy that you can't be > educated, and you can not be helped. Personal attacks weaken your argument and are not appropriate for this list. And despite my disagreements with Ludo on the topics under discussion, I very strongly disagree with your characterization of him. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: A summary of some open discussions
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 13:01:58 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 09:02:36PM +, Brandon Invergo wrote: >> We have started to recognize people as having release-upload rights, even if >> they aren't formal maintainers (this is really fairly recent and so far has >> been >> handled on a case-by-case basis). > > Is there a need to distinguish "releasers" and "maintainers"? I would say > that once the glibc community trusts someone enough to make their releases, > this person should obtain upload rights on the GNU ftp server. And then > it would be logical to call this person a "maintainer", since uploading a new > release is formally the most powerful act in maintaining a package (while > practically, of course inspiring the development, organising the community > and so on are also very important). The term "maintainer" has a particular meaning with the GNU Project, and maintainers have particular responsibilities, as outlined in the agreement that Brandon posted previously. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Moderation
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 22:39:18 -0500, Mike Gerwitz wrote: > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 20:38:03 -0500, nylxs wrote: >> It is the only thing that is productive. > > No, it is not productive. You have caused a significant moderation > burden. For someone trying to stick up for GNU, you're doing a poor job > of working with us. As I've said many times, I oppose public discussion > of governance, and yet moderators' attention has instead been diverted > to moderating hateful messages. This is wasteful for everyone > involved. Would our time not be better spent on substance? To clarify: I didn't mean to imply that I'd inhibit discussions of governance. I merely meant that it'd be more productive to spend my time reading the messages substantively and engaging in constructive discourse. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Moderation
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 20:38:03 -0500, nylxs wrote: > It is the only thing that is productive. No, it is not productive. You have caused a significant moderation burden. For someone trying to stick up for GNU, you're doing a poor job of working with us. As I've said many times, I oppose public discussion of governance, and yet moderators' attention has instead been diverted to moderating hateful messages. This is wasteful for everyone involved. Would our time not be better spent on substance? > So stay on the real topic. GNU needs no changes because it is > effectively run by RMS. Furthermore, GNU is Richard's personal > organization, and people participate either because they support his > vision, or they are delusional. It has NEVER been a Democracy. Please stop with the unkind words. Some people may participate in the GNU Project because they support Richard personally, but certainly not all. We do not even require that maintainers agree with the free software philosophy. We don't even inquire. For example, I support the GNU Project and free software, but I do not pledge support any one person's personal agenda. Richard has explicitly told others to support free software, not him personally. In fact, him and I have disagreed on and debated a number of things within GNU. And considering that he appointed me to the GNU Advisory Committee, I can only assume that he appreciates the constructive (and sometimes harsh) criticism that I provide. Characterizing GNU as "Richard's personal organization" is inaccurate and dangerous because it helps feed the unrest that you're speaking out against. Richard is the Chief GNUisance, but he delegates many responsibilities, and he does ask many people for advise before making decisions. He holds far more authority than he chooses to exercise. > Everything it has ever accomplished is because of his person effort to > float political ideals he feels are vital. rms has made an enormous impact, but this statement diminishes the enormous effort that all of our volunteers have put into GNU over the years---that includes not only maintainers appointed by rms himself or those acting on his behalf, but all contributors of code; documentation; bug reports; support; donations; kind words; and everything else. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: A summary of some open discussions
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 12:23:26 -0500, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > So while they provide infrastructure, and legal advice, etc, it is for > our needs. They do not do any type of oversight, or anything similar > that we follow the software freedom mission. That falls on the > responsibility of the Chief GNUisance. Yes, this is what I meant. I've volunteered in an administrative role for the GNU Project for a number of years now---with the authority to appoint comaintainers to existing packages---and never has the FSF attempted to exercise any type of control over GNU's governance. FSF does have authority over things we delegate to them entirely, such as copyright assignments and trademark enforcement; system administration; and such. But that doesn't give them authority over our other procedures. I've had a personal relationship with a number of people at the FSF over the years, including John Sullivan, and I've never gotten the impression that they had desire to exercise control over GNU. In fact, a current FSF employee is a GNU maintainer, and that employee is treated the same as any other maintainer. John Sullivan is on the GNU Advisory Committee. There he provides advise to rms, but it's just that---rms can choose whether or not he wishes to heed his advise. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: A summary of some open discussions
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 01:05:02 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > This was indeed what I meant. More specifically I said "GNU > maintainers serve at the pleasure of the FSF" because that is what I > really believe. I certainly joined GNU because I support the FSF > mission. My copyright assignment is with the FSF. When I became a GNU > maintainer I was added to some FSF internal lists that said "For ALL > gnu programmers (volunteers included) and programmers of software that > the FSF has included in GNU." As a GNU maintainer the FSF arranged I > could talk to legal counsil (java used to have lots of tricky legal > issues). The FSF sysadmins have always helped with any extra technical > setups GNU projects need. I am a member of the FSF and donate money to > the GNU project through the FSF. The relationship can be confusing; GNU and the FSF have been pretty tightly coupled form the beginning (the FSF was created for GNU), but there are important separations. Clarification about the relationship between GNU and the FSF will hopefully come soon. But GNU maintainers do not serve at the pleasure of the FSF. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: suspending FSF contributor agreements with immediate effect
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 15:39:30 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: > I will continue contributing code to (names of projects) retaining all > intellectual property rights personally during this suspension of the > agreement. Please note that the GNU Project and the FSF avoid use of the term "intellectual property": https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#IntellectualProperty > I also wish to notify you that my contributor agreement will be > reinstated when FSF makes a satisfactory commitment about leadership and > governance issues. I have not yet decided what will constitute a > satisfactory commitment, for now, I will review the proposals put > forward by FSF and I may contribute further criteria as the situation > evolves. The FSF has no authority over the GNU Project, and so this isn't a useful statement. GNU requires copyright assignments for all substantial changes from contributors to GNU packages with copyrights assigned to the FSF. By suspending that, your contributions will not be able to be accepted, and you're predicating the assignment on a condition that is not possible for the FSF to meet. I understand there are frustrations all around, but attempting to force change raises tensions rather than resolving them. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Moderation
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 19:28:18 +0100, Jean Louis wrote: >> A large part of the traffic over the last few weeks was repeated >> ad-hominem attacks, always by the same people. >> >> This is a violation of the list’s stated policy at >> <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss>. It gives a >> poor image of the project and undoubtedly silences many. >> >> I call on to you to make it stop. I reckon moderation is a tough and >> thankless task, and I am grateful for your work, but I think it’s in the >> project’s interest to put an end to abuse of that sort. >> >> Thanks in advance, >> Ludo’. > > Then why did you start in the first place with defamation of GNU > project and RMS? This has been discussed ad nauseam and every conceivable point has been made multiple times over. Let's please move on. People on this list can help out the moderators by not requiring moderation. Please. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: GNU - Principles and Guidelines
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 22:55:04 -0500, DJ Delorie wrote: > Mike Gerwitz writes: >> The FSF does provide essential resources for the GNU Project, but it has >> no say in how the project is governed. Those decisions must be made by >> rms. > > It's important to remember that one of the "essential resources" is the > GNU trademark itself, which means that the FSF has the final say over > who/what can use it and who/what cannot. While this "say" is typically > ceded to RMS, that is at the FSF's sufferance, legally. > > So - worst case - the FSF could revoke RMS's permission to use the GNU > trademark and effectively remove him from the GNU project. I don't ever > expect this to happen (and hope it doesn't) but I'm not going to agree > that the FSF has "no say in how the project is governed" when they > legally/effectively have the power to choose the leader. What you are describing is holding the GNU Project hostage, against its will---a hostile takeover. That isn't governance. > Perhaps remedying this is something that could be added to the > governance discussion - how the GNU leader is chosen, what powers the > FSF is required to cede, and how to enforce those. Discussions of how to mitigate potential legal issues related to Copyright, the GNU trademark, hosting, funding, etc are certainly worth discussion. Even though I have confidence in the FSF today, maybe something will change a decade from now. But those issues are entirely separate from governance. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: GNU - Principles and Guidelines
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 06:19:53 -0500, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: >It would indeed be good if we worked with the FSF to ratify the GNU >Social Contract and make sure it doesn't clash with their mission. > > The FSF is not in a position to ratify anything for the GNU project. I haven't commented up to this point because I haven't had the time to follow the discussion, but this is important. The FSF does provide essential resources for the GNU Project, but it has no say in how the project is governed. Those decisions must be made by rms. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Moderation of gnu-misc-discuss
Hello, everyone: Attacks against individuals will now be considered off-topic for this list. Defenses of attacks against individuals are also off-topic. Let's keep discussion oriented toward the GNU Project and free software. If you have a disagreement with an individual in matters that do pertain to GNU or free software, please communicate kindly and constructively without resorting to attacks. If you have comments about someone's personal opinions or actions unrelated to the GNU Project, it does not belong here. As a reminder, all GNU lists are subject to the kind communication guidelines, found here: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html Additionally, here are some suggestions: Please consider ignoring off-topic messages rather than replying to them on-list; those replies will also be off-topic. Rather than calling out a message as off-topic, please send such messages to gnu-misc-discuss-ow...@gnu.org. If you find that a message is delivered directly to you but has not been delivered to the list, please do not include gnu-misc-discuss in the list of recipients---such replies not only cause confusion, but may quote a message that has been rejected from the list. Please also try to avoid tangents that distract from the topic under discussion. If a tangent happens to be on-topic for this list, please consider starting a new thread or changing the subject line. Otherwise, please continue such discussions in private by dropping gnu-misc-discuss from the list of recipients. If you have any questions, feel free to reply to this thread or contact me or Brandon privately. Thank you! -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: list moderation
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 15:45:40 -0500, Thompson, David wrote: > I hope you can see the terrible optics this has. Something has > happened behind the scenes, shortly after you and Mike became > moderators, that makes it appear as though Carlos and Mark were > retaliated against for being critical of GNU leadership. The optics are indeed terrible. But please trust me when I say that Brandon does not deserve the criticism that he is getting. As he said, we're not going to discuss internal GNU matters here. I'm sorry for the vagueness, but pressing it here won't get anyone any further. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Cross-posting to other GNU lists
Hello, everyone: When posting to this list, please do not cross-post to other GNU lists. If it's appropriate for discussion here, then that means that it's not appropriate for other lists. If you reply to a cross-posted message, please remove the other list from your reply. Thank you! -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 23:59:02 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote: > I don't care what your moderation is. I will just copy to places that > don't moderate [...] My intent is not to censor you. I would prefer that you be able to communicate your thoughts openly. I'm trying to help ensure that you can do that. Can you please compromise on the way you're phrasing certain things so that the substance of your messages can still be heard by others? You will reach people much more easily if you don't have to resort to copying your message other places. As it stands now, the tone of your message gets in the way. I end up not reading your messages because of it. If enough people are doing this, then you are not effectively defending rms. -- Mike Gerwitz signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)
Ruben: On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 22:32:04 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote: > Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your > posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on > the intelligence of the GNU community. [...] > I'm telling you what most of us who are adults understand and we > feel attacked by you, and Sandra. [...] > Sod off ... GNU has nothing to be ashamed for and neither does RMS. This is unkind and unconstructive. We have chosen to remove blanket moderation from this list, but we do so hoping that we can trust people to carry out appropriate discussions. Please stop. I understand that you find certain statements to be upsetting, but words like these do nothing but undermine whatever point you're trying to make. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: GNU project _does_ discriminate contributors by classes
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 17:43:05 +0300, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote: > Jean Louis wrote: >> GNU project does not discriminate by gender, or other classes, neither >> verifies genders of contributors, or their classes, as everybody is >> welcome to contribute > > To the best of my knowledge, thatʼs completely untrue: major GNU subprojects > do discriminate contributors by classes: if a contributor-to-be happens to > be an employee, FSF does not trust his words about origin of his > contribution, he has to bring a reference from his employer. > > Speaking frankly, even if we put aside how time-consuming it may be, itʼs > hard for me to imagine what can be more degrading and thus ‘alienating’ to > someone, than a straightaway demand to prove that he is not a liar. This is a legal issue and has nothing to do with discrimination. I had to have my employer sign one of those waivers. The purpose is to put my contributions on solid legal ground. _I_ can claim that I have the legal right to make those contributions, but what happens when the FSF goes to enforce copyright and my employer goes to argue that they have no authority to do so because I never had the right to assign copyright to the FSF for my contributions to begin with? But since my employer has signed a waiver, there's no question. And I'm thankful for that, because it also removes any concern from my mind. (In fact, in my case, the FSF's legal team and my employer had to negotiate terms under which my contributions are assignable.) As Jason Self mentioned, this isn't always necessary. In my case it was necessary because some of the code I was assigning was written during work hours. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B 2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05 https://mikegerwitz.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: I heard about a non libre operating system and I wondered if a libre version could be made...
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 16:37:34 -0400, Zap wrote: > any thoughts to this idea of making a fully libre version of this > operating system? They do make mention of this: https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/user-faq/#will-qubes-seek-gnu-fsdg I'd love to see a fully free Qubes; that is what has held me back from trying it (lack of linux-libre, specifically); I don't have the time to start stripping things out of the OS myself. -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer GPG: 2217 5B02 E626 BC98 D7C0 C2E5 F22B B815 8EE3 0EAB https://mikegerwitz.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Re: Software cannot be free, but users can be
terms, etc. you can still protect key freedoms. It is up to you to decide if you want to grow with a really freedom focused path, or continue down the Stalinist road to its bitter end. Hope you understand these concerns. Nothing you have mentioned is new. Please look over the resources on GNU's website: - https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/essays-and-articles.html Also consider looking at the history of free software and open source (Wikipedia is a good enough start) to see how each of your above concerns has been addressed over the years. - -- Mike Gerwitz Free Software Hacker | GNU Maintainer http://mikegerwitz.com FSF Member #5804 | GPG Key ID: 0x8EE30EAB -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUq022AAoJEPIruBWO4w6rkrMQAKAnViePpY50szf1qeg6uikw 3Gz3VEtkrfhrp7v+dBXodI6nct3wovqUa96xzEnOCPHocOY2v5K62LC1a/OYMWZ5 dN+8SxdHX915ksoKhnnWy4FOPslHoS/chKi0V9HifMQdDBaArh2AL63B65OjL9jU AClsCxSGcRBvpboUD81GAokwg2+hm3DkHcyRgFQ1a/OUocXdM/RJPvRsKliwTXOa A1V2hIeFzDYPstpkJoKTEZK6AqjOyPAvlyA4lm2xJ4sjk0Dsas3LI5k0jZtNC1gF 12bkmdGPqZRNfgLl/xxuW1O0cLpygIXc0vnHHObVg8qLXUxd/HTN16y07OUY69cJ qvXrToJAs7V/nyPwC4xN+AtVHcYI7z38Ci1QdDTh3A1OCCif9ukhtHdBneEoRNIJ 84dODIzZ//VJ+Qj93hJsyH1rGE8/cuwTz897ztXTLtrkGgGF6BODoagshYFpfeGK WlknntEAukFACS4qs9Okqlvj5Fo0t0mbJhmXif2euBDkbAS/jBK7eku87Ze00cz9 hEF3VdMT5XvSUKATuSGFAllz1F+XpFkLgIfGtXSnUBNJs3npvb/QyUX+bfYLywBF JaHObPqhWxsahR+NGTLRnssPZ1MUlWZ9KLA/oAqJg+1hXznkW4hRTk3OTFR31UL2 No0wtsnxV21uKXYaCRgH =A8Wh -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
