On 15/06/18 00:13, Carmen Bianca Bakker wrote:
> Dear Daniel,
>
> On ĵaŭ, 2018-06-14 at 22:37 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> This statement could create the impression that Daniel Pocock was the
>>> one vote against the simplification of the membership procedure.
>>> However, this is not the
On 14/06/18 23:48, Alessandro Rubini wrote:
> I try to post no more than once a day, for several reasons, but this is
> otrageous.
>
>> Some people may have chosen not to attend the meeting so that it
>> wouldn't achieve quorum.
>
> Such people may be polite enough to state that clearly in
Hi,
Am 2018-06-14 um 22:36 schrieb Daniel Pocock:
> To make it clear, FSFE has a community with hundreds of long time
> supporters/fellows/volunteers who have contributed time and money
> regularly over many years but have:
>
> - no right to petition for a general meeting
>
> - no right to
On 14/06/18 21:57, Reinhard Müller wrote:
> Hi, all!
>
> Just to avoid misunderstandings:
>
> Am 2018-06-14 um 21:33 schrieb Daniel Pocock:
>> As the last[1] man standing for democracy in FSFE,[...]
>>
>> 1. https://fsfe.org/news/2018/news-20180526-01.en.html
>
> This statement could create
On 14/06/18 21:58, Florian Snow wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
>
> Daniel Pocock writes:
>> As the last[1] man standing for democracy in FSFE
>
> Perhaps this is meant as a joke, but you usually do not make that clear
> in your writing, so I am assuming it is serious. This is an incredibly
>
Hi Daniel,
Daniel Pocock writes:
> As the last[1] man standing for democracy in FSFE
Perhaps this is meant as a joke, but you usually do not make that clear
in your writing, so I am assuming it is serious. This is an incredibly
insulting statement to many people within the FSFE. You are
Hi, all!
Just to avoid misunderstandings:
Am 2018-06-14 um 21:33 schrieb Daniel Pocock:
> As the last[1] man standing for democracy in FSFE,[...]
>
> 1. https://fsfe.org/news/2018/news-20180526-01.en.html
This statement could create the impression that Daniel Pocock was the
one vote against
Hi all,
As the last[1] man standing for democracy in FSFE, I propose to give a
report at the community meeting[2] at RMLL
It is important for me to understand the topics you want me to cover as
so many things have happened in free software and in FSFE in recent times.
Some of the things
First of all, I fully accept your position although I don't agree to it
and its reasoning.
# Mat Witts [2018-06-14 10:35 +0200]:
> For me, I think until the FSFE abandons what seems to me to resemble a
> kind of 'watered-down' market-led ideology at the highest level and
> fully adopts a more
> Daniel's article about the use of proprietary software and services
by the FSFE:
> https://danielpocock.com/pmpc-for-fsfe-itself
> ...a long discussion last year, starting here...
> https://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/2017-June/011591.html
> ...and ending here:
>
Context: Daniel Pocock writes in his own blog that he will repost at
the next GA meeting a motion that did not pass at the previous GA
meeting. Unchanged, seemingly.
Paul Boddie:
>>> I was surprised that Daniel's motion to document the FSFE's proprietary
>>> dependencies, and to describe ways
11 matches
Mail list logo
