Hey Quiliro, thanks for your response.
Nov 21, 2019, 01:26 by quil...@riseup.net: >> especially as we know for sure that he faked >> documents he shared here and in his blog before? >> > > I do not know that HE faked anything. I don't understand who is "we" in > your statement. It is possible that I would not trust someone. But I > will not judge them guilty even if the law claims them offenders, unless > I personally can see proof which convinces me. Anyway, the documents > FSFE publishes are the best source. > I agree regarding the document source. That's the minutes FSFE published: https://fsfe.org/about/legal/minutes/minutes-2019-10-12.en.pdf And that's the fake Daniel published in a way that it looks like the original and which he used to construct his story:https://fsfellowship.eu/assets/fsfe-minutes-2019-10-12.en.pdf Before that there where more fake documents spread in this list. I asked him if he also created the other fake documents but he refused to answer. >> As you are a FSFLA member. Did you reached out to your sister >> organizations (FSFE, FSF US and maybe some colleagues at FSFLA) and >> asked them about their opinion to get some first hand information? >> > > Not FSFE, but the others yes. Nevertheless, they are very cautious about > making public statements lately. > please let us know if you have an answer. >> Did >> you already reached out to John Sullivan pointing him to the mail >> shared by Daniel and asked him if this is really what he wrote?> >> > > I might. This is not necessary at the moment because the issue is not > John's email. The main issue for me is if FSFE is in fact working in the > same direction that FSF has or it takes the direction of OSI. > Many arguments which might suggest that FSFE is no longer on track are based on documents and mails spread here. So I think the question whether they are true or if all the arguments are build on fake mails and documents is a crucial one. > If it is > the later, I or of any of the organizations I support would not make > FSFE an allie. > It seems like at the moment at least all the other FSF* consider FSFE still an allie, maybe that a more trustworthy source then a mailing list where it is proven that the main initiator spreed fake documents in order to support his arguments? > > My connections to these organizations are as direct as yours. I am not > searching for personal positions from the members of these > organizations. > OK, then it was my misunderstanding. I thought you are an active FSFLA member with internal contacts. > > It is also necessary to stop attacking Daniel because FSFE is a stronger > party than him. It is not a fair fight. A mob attack is not good image > for an organization. Rather, FSFE should concentrate on its transparency > about how it handles affairs, instead of letting doubts arise by the > secrecy. > For me it is still not clear who attacks whom. If I look at all the mails here, the fake documents, the blog posts it looks like Daniel is attacking various free software organizations way more than the other way around. >> Just asking questions... >> > > A lot of statements in your questions! > But most of the time statements which carry a indirect question mark ;)
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
