Re: evidence of FSFE & Debian blackmail conspiracies (was: more leaks of FSFE treachery and Daniel's heroism)
* Patrick Driscoll [2019-11-08 17:40]: > When people attack you personally versus your points, that’s a dead giveaway > as to their motivations. Please don’t go quietly under the rug! Push the > broom back and spill all the dirt everywhere, Daniel. > > I’ve heard theory after theory of how the sudden influx of social > justice people into open source - per your example of “pronoun > policing” as a threat to another member - is a thinly veiled effort > by big business to control its path. Daniel’s expulsion and the > textbook DARVO responses of those he exposed are the proof in the > pudding. Those things don't come spontaneously. It is campaign. Somebody is sitting and doing the checklist. 1. [X] Gaming community, DONE. 2. [X] Comics, DONE. 3. [X] Free Software Foundation, DONE. 4. [X] Science Fiction, DONE. 5. [X] Anime, DONE. 6. [ ] who is next? ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: fall of Berlin Wall, rebuilt by FSFE?
* Daniel Pocock [2019-11-06 12:52]: > > > On 06/11/2019 12:12, The one with the questions wrote: > > As you now obviously and knowingly shared (and created?) a fake protocol > > fake is not a good choice of word > > The character assassination has been removed, the empty spaces replaced > with a history of what went wrong in FSFE. > > But none of that really matters: what matters is the question: why did > 11 members of FSFE e.V. travel to Essen for a weekend and pass a motion > abusing a single volunteer? > > They obviously have nothing more useful to do with their time. > > If you can't force a volunteer to say what you want, you work together > to hurt them. FSFE is sadly not managed in same manner as FSF and GNU as original projects. ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: evidence of FSFE & Debian blackmail conspiracies (was: more leaks of FSFE treachery and Daniel's heroism)
* Alexander Dahl [2019-11-12 00:14]: > Hello, > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 11:38:54PM +0530, Jean Louis wrote: > > * Patrick Driscoll [2019-11-08 17:40]: > > > I’ve heard theory after theory of how the sudden influx of social > > > justice people into open source - per your example of “pronoun > > > policing” as a threat to another member - is a thinly veiled effort > > > by big business to control its path. Daniel’s expulsion and the > > > textbook DARVO responses of those he exposed are the proof in the > > > pudding. > > > > Those things don't come spontaneously. It is campaign. Somebody is > > sitting and doing the checklist. > > > > 1. [X] Gaming community, DONE. > > > > 2. [X] Comics, DONE. > > > > 3. [X] Free Software Foundation, DONE. > > > > 4. [X] Science Fiction, DONE. > > > > 5. [X] Anime, DONE. > > > > 6. [ ] who is next? > > You know this sounds like a conspiracy theory, don't you? Well, could > you consider it possible, that this is not some weird plan of some > secret entity, but well, non coordinated society change? Like right to > vote for women, abolition of slavery, etc.? I am fighter for human rights. My past efforts helped hundreds of patients in Germany, where I have achieved change in certain paragraph of the criminal law. It was necessary to speak to parliament members, in particular my broken German communication reached through. In Norway, Oslo, I have achieved liberating decisions in parliament that could affect hundreds of artists. Every reasonable person is supporting justice. But not the mob justice, not call-out culture, public shamings and division of communities by politics. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: FWIW: gnu-misc-disc...@gnu.org is premoderated
* Quiliro Ordóñez [2019-11-06 03:47]: > El 2019-10-30 07:27, Jean Louis escribió: > > * Quiliro Ordóñez [2019-10-30 13:13]: > >> Has censorship been confirmed on that mailing list or was it a > >> misunderstanding? > > > > Moderation is happening on that mailing list. There is somebody, > > unknown to me, who will reject messages. > > Will you forward me any censored messages? Please prepend the subject > line with: 'Censored:' so I can recognize them. Thank you very much. 22 messages they blocked my side. They have been blocking facts that debunk their public shamings. This means "moderators" knew there are facts, and it was no in their benefit to show it to public. Those censors have been removed. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: some advice from Barack Obama to Free Software communities?
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-16 18:35]: > > What is fellowship? Any reference to it? > > https://fsfellowship.eu/2018/09/08/who-were-the-fsfe-fellowship.html Thank you, that is good that you are trying to make it transparent. In fact the FSFE would get more supporters with more transparency. To say that "infrastructure" expense is 130,000 euro means really nothing and so the other financial categories, that is not transparent at all. > An email circulated by Matthias Kirschner contains the quote: One > general wish -- which I agreed with -- from Debian was to better > share information about people. The email went around privately, as it > is mostly defamatory I'm not planning to publish it publicly. I think it is better to open that and make it clear. > What you describe is politics 101: the people who control the > infrastructure will do what they want, rule by decree and use codes of > conduct as a justification for whatever they want to do anyway. These > are more arguments for changing the structure of FSF and GNU. Yes, and I think it does happen for money. Each of those inside of the e.V. or German non-profit also receive some money from foundation, have their privileges, donations, good image of various other communities, that position is power position which they would not like to destroy. My impression is that they are not quite motivated by free software philosophy, they are doing goods works in general, but would money not be there it is very questionable who would really remain promoting the free software philosophy. And when I said they are doing good work in general I think they could be doing much more provided the money is more efficiently managed. What remains free is for each of free software politicians, people who are pushing the free software philosophy as laid out by RMS, is to promote the same, to take the bunch of articles as published by RMS and to promote the philosophy in the society without any organization. Just donate to your next webmaster to replicate all the articles of free software philosophy, choose one GNU system distribution you like most and make a mirror of it, organize one social action yourself, like a seminar. I did two of those back in time, 17 years ago in Stuttgart, Germany, and I can keep doing more in East Africa even this year. Each of us can push ideology into society, just donate to yourself or your next fellow who is willing to do it, you can skip organizations. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: FSFE and proof
File not found. Better link? Jean * wikile...@mailo.com [2019-10-16 20:43]: > > heres the proof > > > > https://file.io/tTMyxr > > > > pococks write, fsfe done 15 years of backstabbing, this is the end-game > > > > when the time comes please don't shoot all of us > > > > remarkable that rms and fsfe both go down at the same time. fsfe has no more > reason to exist when there is nobody left to hate ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: [Backtotheaugust] Fwd: Joint statement on the GNU Project + gnu-system-discuss
ned. More facts: https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ Look at the case study of Ambedkar Community Computing Center, where Richard Stallman promoted free software and did something for all India. One of the underprivileged kids who attends classes at the Center has achieved a high level of skill in the use of GIMP. His works have been presented and sold at a local Free Software conference. The picture on the right shows him handing in to Richard Stallman a copy of an essay titled “The Future is Ours”, which was produced at the Center. Look at video: https://www.gnu.org/education/edu-software-gimp.html#Mani Free software changed life of those people. That is accomplishment of Richard Stallman, the GNU project and Free Software Foundation. Look more accomplishments: https://www.gnu.org/education/edu-cases-india-irimpanam.html Look at article of Dr. V. Sasi Kumar, The Education System in India, with accomplishment to use free software at many places in India. Do you think that is a "coincidence"? Do you know that Richard Stallman enlightened former president of India A. P. J. Abdul Kalam on free software and then President promoted and recommended free software to wide population? See: https://sites.google.com/site/ilugjammu/home/a-p-j-kalam-r-stallman-dicussion-on-open-source https://www.linux.com/news/richard-stallman-meets-president-india/ Free Software Foundation president Richard Stallman (RMS) was in Denmark in May 2019. After a visit to the beach in nearby Slettestrand the day before, RMS went to Aalborg, where he delivered his speech “Free software and your freedom”1 at Aalborg University (AAU), on May 6th. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/photo-blog-2019-may-aalborg-copenhagen Free Software Foundation president Richard Stallman (RMS) was in Brno, Czech Republic, on June 6, 2019, to give two speeches. In the morning, he took part in the URBIS Smart City Fair, at the Brno Fair Grounds, giving his speech "Computing, freedom, and privacy."1 https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/photo-blog-2019-june-brno Free Software Foundation president Richard Stallman (RMS) went on a 12-city visit to Brazil and Argentina this past May and June. The trip took him… …to the Federal Institute of São Paulo, in Araraquara, São Paulo, Brazil, where, on May 14th, he gave his speech "A Free Digital Society."1 The event was well attended, with universities and schools from neighboring cities having organized to shuttle their students to it by bus. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/may-2018-photos-from-brazil-and-argentina RMS in The Guardian: “A radical proposal to keep your personal data safe” by Dana Morgenstein — Published on Apr 09, 2018 10:23 AM Here at the Free Software Foundation (FSF), we're never surprised when another violation of privacy by Facebook or other bad actors is exposed: it has long since been obvious that Facebook is a gold mine for government surveillance and advertisers. However, we also recognize that social media has become a crucial part of everyday life, which is why we urge you to ditch Facebook and instead utilize freedom-respecting, distributed, user-controlled services like GNU social, Mastodon, or Diaspora. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/rms-in-the-guardian-201ca-radical-proposal-to-keep-your-personal-data-safe201d-1 January was a relatively quiet month for FSF president Richard Stallman (RMS), so we're taking this opportunity to look back on a few speeches that RMS gave last year and that we did not get a chance to report on. On February 6th, 2017, RMS was at Reykjavík University, in Reykjavík, Iceland, to give his speech “Free software: For your freedom and privacy,” to about 200 people. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/photo-blog-2017-retrospective-reykjavik-eastlansing-potsdam-montreal-salta You are putting focus on your sexual or asexual viewpoints, whatever rants you have against RMS, speak to him as he keeps his personal political notes outside of GNU project. I am putting focus on free software and promotion of free software, if you have something to say in that regard let me know. But your blog is speaking for itself, it is rumor mongering factory, and I am very very sorry for your state of mind, you must be troubled, you have no calm sleep, and all what you are trying to do is to justify the harm that you are doing to this community. Same is valid for your Thoughtpolice Squad on Guix pages. > Yours in free software, > > Andy I don't trust you. Jean Louis Footnotes: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: [Backtotheaugust] Re: Fwd: Joint statement on the GNU Project + gnu-system-discuss
RMS was smart and have envisioned the GNU kind communication guidelines, for GNU to remain apolitical, with only politics being free software politics and human rights in computing. That is quite clear. Some find it hard to understand. As soon as the Thoughtpolice Squad started punishing RMS and thus anybody else who thinks different, and for the Thoughtcrime reasons there sprung protests, outrages, community division and distrust. The Thoughtpolice Squad is inviting more and more people to join with them to separate the GNU project into splitter groups. Man, I don't mind if I disagree in one subject with somebody, I cannot possible agree on everything, this is hard to achieve even with one person. What I mind is to agree on those issues that matter, on those issues that are common to us. That is how we eat together, that is how we drink together and spend time together. Because of things we have in common. If we start pointing to things we have not get in common, we will never agree on anything. That is not GNU community. Reason we are friends is because we do agree on something, we find something together. That something is free software and users' rights in free software. The Thoughtpolice Squad does not understand what means "building a community". They are introducing "how GNU maintainers shall think" and impose their political rules onto everbody. Several people are departing in fear of punishments for wrong thinking. If we speak of community, if anybody can be said to be "father of communities" that is Richard Stallman. His vision on computing and programming community was simply picked and spread throughout the world in various different branches, it does not matter how they named themselves, free software was spreading faster than one can think. Plethora or communites are established by themselves due to GNU project. Due to work of Dr. Richard Stallman. Did Linus envision community? No. He envisioned kernel and accomplished it. He has not get any sense for community, his politics is not planetary and he has no rules on good conduct. Please Guix people, if you are punishing RMS for his political notes, then how about removing Linus too for his direct aggressive and bad behavior within Linux kernel? Are you going to ask Linus to step down too for reasons of Thoughtcrime? But Linus is not paying Guix people with donations of US $100,000. FSF is paying, so they have to have "friends" in the FSF who are supporting unspoken departure of RSM and who are tolerating politics on GNU project pages. It is about money, power in organization, their position and good will. But they are getting contrary results to what they wanted. RMS envisioned community and got multiple varieties of communities all over the world, that is legacy of RMS. Even those who don't like him, they speak bad about him within the community that RMS created. Unbelievable but true. Yet communities are all over the world and they all sprung due to free software. No defamation, slander, bad mouth and bitching can ignore the fact. RMS is father of free software communities. Only very kind person will allow the Thoughtpolice Squad to defame him for reasons of Thoughtcrime on his own project page GNU.ORG. RMS quotes on what he did after the first collapse of the community: "So I looked for a way that a programmer could do something for the good. I asked myself, was there a program or programs that I could write, so as to make a community possible once again? The answer was clear: what was needed first was an operating system. That is the crucial software for starting to use a computer. With an operating system, you can do many things; without one, you cannot run the computer at all. With a free operating system, we could again have a community of cooperating hackers—and invite anyone to join. And anyone would be able to use a computer without starting out by conspiring to deprive his or her friends." The second collapse of the community is happening now. The answer is clear to the second collapse of the community: Enforce the "freedom zero" within the community: that everybody is welcome in the community of free software users and programmers, regardless of their viewpoints, gender, political issues, make a list here of other things, and allow only free software. Including everybody and including RMS. Everybody shall be welcome regardless of their political views outside of the GNU project. Jean Louis ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: minutes, surveys, polls and hoaxes
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-21 13:02]: > Two surveys/polls were distributed. One includes[4] a link to my blog, > the other even includes[5] my name. The former asks people to send me > money. Please note I'm not asking people for money: I've previously > suggested the best thing to do with your money is keep it in local > groups or give it to developers you know personally. > > Hoaxes often cut-and-paste many things that are true to gain our > confidence and then change some minor details to exploit our trust. For > example, maybe the minutes are 99% true but the results of the votes > have been changed. The poll with various links includes a link to an > FSFE page about a Fellow who died but it doesn't include any proof that > the same person gave the bequest. FSFE had 1500 Fellows at its peak, > mostly white German males between 30 - 50 years old. Actuarial tables > tell us that age group has a 0.2% rate of death: in other words, 3 > Fellows die each year, so the probability that the named Fellow gave the > bequest may be less than 33%. The use of my name, links and phrases > cut-and-pasted directly from previous emails/blogs has prompted some > people to assume I may have started the surveys/polls. This is exactly > how a hoaxer would want you to feel. > > The only thing we can be sure of is that some people have a lot of time > for these games. I am glad that you have this ability to distinguish between truthful and fake documents. That is exactly what is expected from a programmer. There are indications that you should also think of, and indication is that FSFE did receive copy of those documents, including the President, and there is no public trace that I know that they responded to those documents. That is in my opinion not logical. If document is fake or not genuine, FSFE shall tell you straight, at least to you. That is most logical expected action. When this does not take place, it is contradictory, and it has to be investigated further until truth is found. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: some advice from Barack Obama to Free Software communities?
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-16 14:41]: > When he uses the FSF*derivative name and his title to demote the > philosophy, that is rather unpleasant. People see the FSF* name and > some think it represents the same philosophy as FSF. Promotion of free software philosophy is not for FSFE in first place. Yes, they do it: https://fsfe.org/about/basics/freesoftware.en.html but that is simply inadequate, with too few references and allowing dillution as you said. Some pages are missing like: https://fsfe.org/freesoftware/transcripts/The-name-GNU Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: some advice from Barack Obama to Free Software communities?
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-16 12:26]: > > I hear that the FSFE annual meeting recently decided to make various > changes to their constitution, removing Richard Stallman's name and > inserting Open Source, then extending the 2 year term of Matthias > Kirschner indefinitely so he can be president for life. > > Let's hope it is all fake news. It would be good to provide link or reference. But it does not matter really, as everbody is free to open up their own FSF, do you understand? You can do it in Germany. Even articles and by-laws of FSF in Boston are welcoming friendly other FSF organizations. The free software philosophy is free, licensed to be free for anybody, so the foundation for any new FSF is laid out, and GNU system is already in existence in multiples, everbody can form their own organizations. I would not bash them for that, but then we shall promote free software philosophy without politics. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: some advice from Barack Obama to Free Software communities?
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-16 14:41]: > > > On 16/10/2019 08:21, Dr. Michael Stehmann wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Am 16.10.19 um 09:06 schrieb Jean Louis: > > > >> I would not bash them for that, but then we shall promote free > >> software philosophy without politics. > > > > IMO that is not possible. > > > > May be one thinks, (s)he can promote open source philosophy without > > politics, but not Free Software philosophy. > > > > Promoting freedom has necessarily political implications. > > > > When Kirschner asserts[1] that free software and open source are the > same thing, he appears to be demoting and subverting the philosophy, > denying it is important, maybe even ridiculing it. It is like diluting > fuel with methanol or some other cheaper substance. Yes, I do agree to that. And FSF-friendly organizations such as FSFE or any others shall be subject to review and analysis based on how much they promote the free software philosophy and user rights, versus anything else. Yet if they are not promoting the free software philosophy, then they maybe promote only free software and then we shall consider such groups friend, not enemies. > When he uses the FSF*derivative name and his title to demote the > philosophy, that is rather unpleasant. People see the FSF* name and > some think it represents the same philosophy as FSF. That is true, and yet Internet is accessible to everybody, so even to members of the FSFE. People cannot learn free software philosophy in one day, it is process that may take long time, many years for somebody to realize what the value of it. For myself I have first realized what means GPL, as I have taken time to read it back in 1999. In fact I was convinced that GPL is yet another proprietary license and I was rather fan of warez and copying the software as I wish, "cracked" software was for me number one option. Then I have purchased GNU/Linux book with DVD inside, and because I have purchased it, by thinking it is proprietary, I have taken time to read the GPL. When I understood the GPL, at that time I did not know nothing about the free software philosophy, but I have got big relief that I can freely distribute the software. It was in fact so unbelievable that I have not believed it for longer time, unspoken of being well aware of free software philosophy, I required several months to understand it all in details. At that time I did not know about www.gnu.org website neither FSF, I have been reading it rather through files distributed with GNU Emacs such as GNU Manifesto and similar. The point of the anegdote is that people using "open source" and which are invited to "open source" will not immediately know what is free software philosophy in my opinion, but also those who are invited to "fre software" will need time to understand the user rights and freedom and control issues. All those users have potential one by one, step by step, to understand about free software philosophy, so they are friendly, they are at least in the group of free software users which are still not aware of free software, that is much better than proprietary software users, right? > Doing a combination of changes to an organization's constitution and > doing them at this particular point in time would also be a calculated > insult to the founder of the movement. Kicking a volunteer while he is > down. It is a particularly nasty type of organization that harasses > volunteers even after they have resigned. Which one? > It only adds weight to the assertion that FSFE is an organization > founded on a grudge, not on the Free Software philosophy. > > If you add up their financial disclosures, you find they raised > approximately €3 million in the last 15 years using the FSF* name, a > name taken from the person they are insulting. How could they be more > ungrateful? I agree on that, that is how it is. But that is their organization. I can just suggest to open up your own FSF type of organization, nobody is forbidding it, as all articles of Dr. Richard Stallman are freely licensed. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: some advice from Barack Obama to Free Software communities?
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-16 18:03]: > It isn't just the FSFE. Back in Roman times they would demote people > to be non-citizens and take away their vote, like demoting the Fellows > to be Supporters. Every now and then they would kill some slaves to > keep all the other slaves in fear. > > Romans used lions and tigers to kill their slaves, now it is email > lynchings but isn't it the same mindset? > > > It is unlikely that all these organizations who kicked you out did so > > without reason. > > I wasn't kicked out, I resigned: > > https://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/2018-September/012650.html What is fellowship? Any reference to it? > A few weeks later Matthias Kirschner had a meeting with Chris Lamb > (Debian) in Italy somewhere and decided to make ongoing hostilities. > Why this vendetta, why didn't they let sleeping dogs lie after I > resigned? Which hostilities, any reference? > Look at the FSF archives and see if you can find the message I posted in > support of RMS: > > https://danielpocock.com/what-does-fsf-censor/ > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2019-10/index.html > > Notice that messages posted by Jean Louis and I today don't appear there > either. Censorship. Smoking gun. That is moderated, censored, forbidden, for reasons that they will simply say it is off-topic. Maybe even Richard Stallman is censored too. They censored many of my messages, and I was just answering to people. I am not even initiating the conversation. Just answering. But Guix leaders' statement was off-topic for GNU project and nobody is censoring their page. That is my point, I would not say anything would there be 1 (one) person responsible to keep GNU project apolitical or to supervise websites according to GNU kind communication guidelines. Basically everything that RMS said that relates to GNU project and free software represents free software philosophy. That includes GNU kind communication guidelines and the point that GNU shall remain apolitical, and that only politics shall be free software and related human rights. So if there is no inner moderation of politics and bad conduct, then I am protesting. And even Guix developers think that it is off-topic to post it to Guix-devel and help-guix mailing lists, I think it is very on-topic as they started posting off-topic defamation of the RMS on Guix pages. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: censorship alternatives
* br...@tracciabi.li [2019-10-24 14:20]: > You have a problem somewhere in your browser / operating system / > DNS / internet provider (/ government). > Try https://web.archive.org/web/shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html > Use Tor Browser https://www.torproject.org/ If some Windows browser is used, or maybe even Google Chrome on GNU operating system, or maybe even Firefox, some websites and some extensions are intentionally corrupt and may be leading users to affiliates to earn commissions. ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: censorship alternatives
* Lori Nagel [2019-10-23 21:00]: > http://shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html redirects to this site about > buying Viagra > if you type in http://shirky.com/ > and then add the other stuff you can get to the essay. I don't know > why, probably an improperly configured web server that hasn't been > updated in over 15 years. DNS is not same as web server. I get the same site properly: Clay Shirky I study the effects of the internet on society. I've written two recent books on the subject: Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations (2008) and Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age (2010). What can be is that you are using some weird DNS server which can be redirecting you. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: FSFE and proof
* wikile...@mailo.com [2019-10-17 03:06]: > > On 16/10/2019 17:25:40 Europe/Paris Jean Louis wrote: > > > File not found. Better link? > > oopsie, try again > > https://www5.zippyshare.com/v/7dKJ52VQ/file.html That is insightful. The corruption lies in "open source", it has corrupted true goals of free software in the FSFE. Making compromises influences directly what is done in society. Obviously it is money issue. Yet everybody is free is to open new foundations or form organizations as they wish, right? Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: on SJWs and feminists
* Danny Spitzberg [2019-10-18 20:43]: > Yep, I’ll agree there’s a lot of fascist-like behavior under the guise of > freedom of speech. Quite the horseshoe effect! Freedom of speech is for fascists too. Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. I am not fascist, but I will tell to public that fascist have same freedom and same rights as non-fascists. Otherwise, if one would forbid freedom of speech to fascist, one would become fascist. So we would be going in circle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: the FSFE resignations (was: Fwd: where there's smoke, there's fire)
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-18 20:06]: > What would be more interesting is the audio recordings from the meeting > and the names of people voting for and against particular motions. In regards to those minutes, if they are real: Changes of the statute require a majority of three quarters of the delivered valid voices; abstentions are not counted. Dissolution of the FSFE requires four fifths of the voices of all members of the association. Changing the purpose of the FSFE can only be decided with unanimous agreement of all members. Members not present at the General Assembly can submit their agreement in writing to the president within one month. So they removed that, making further changes even easier. They have some legal advisor, is name known? I think that everybody can collect email addresses from a mailing list to inform members, that is not illegal, as information of members is genuine interest for organization. They are trying to make it illegal case. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: on SJWs and feminists
* Christian Imhorst [2019-10-18 20:29]: > Dear Daniel, > > Am 18.10.19 um 11:24 schrieb Daniel Pocock: > > As a native English speaker, I'll simply comment that some people do > > generally use the word gas in that context > > okay but ahilter doesn't, because he wrote: > > Am 17.10.19 um 16:41 schrieb ahil...@keemail.me: > > people like you *would have been gassed* for attacking our leader! That type of "speech" falls into harassment, is not protected by free speech laws. Mailing list owner could moderate it to keep nice conversation. But if somebody makes generalizations and speaks in what one thinks is "fascist", that alone, if it is not harassment, shall be protected by free speech rights and their opinions is to be respected. But does fascism fall into the topic of the mailing list? That is the question. Free speech means to respect other people's opinions and rights to express them even if one does not like those opinions. Who is raised in Germany, France and other countries known for suppression of free speech, maybe finds it hard to assume such non-partisan viewpoint and allow others free speech. Mailing list owner can always set rules and say what is allowed or what shall be on topic and thus may moderate. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: FSFE GA minutes, fake or proof? (was: Fwd: Joint statement on the GNU Project + gnu-system-discuss)
* Lori Nagel [2019-10-17 18:30]: > I can see them extending the terms on president and vice president > especially if they are meeting up in person. I mean, what a pain, > all get somewhere in Europe to meet. We need better free software > video conferencing solutions. > As far as cutting the ties to the FSF goes, it seems like they > wanted to make it a bit more political and not support stuff like > dictatorships. I can kind of understand, I mean this is Europe, > they had World War II there. Their structures are much more fragile > than ours in the USA. (not that we are immune from the possibility, > and it is something we must be ever vigilant about) I did not want to introduce bad examples of other organizations. Basically now they are afraid of Daniel Pocock as well, and wish to sue him for reasons of informing public. Daniel, now you are the target... maybe I will be next, then this list comes, Thoughtpolice Squad is recruiting their members. May I understand why Werner Koch is said "good bye"? Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: FSFE GA minutes, fake or proof? (was: Fwd: Joint statement on the GNU Project + gnu-system-discuss)
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-17 15:19]: > It has some mistakes in it though so maybe it is fake. It also strikes > me as odd that any organization could pass motions changing the quota > requirements so dramatically without any opposition from members. Process is similar to corporations, and it is corporation in itself as it is legal entity (e.V.) There is normally one or two bosses, and they decide everything and propose agendas and so on, other people are just following. As we do not know the statute, and the law, it is hard to say that something is wrong. Constitution document is not reachable: https://fsfe.org/about/transparency-commitment.html But if there is something wrong in the e.V. even members and I think also public individuals can make complaints not only to them but to regulatory bodies. > Why would they increase the president's term from 2 years to 6 > years? That question is so common, it is quite similar to presidents and political party leaders who try to change constitutions to increase terms for their favors. I do not say it is wrong though, I do not know. But it is common that people in power while in power are abusing that power to gain more benefits from the group they are in. > It seems incredible that a bunch of 11 people travel to Essen to > have a meeting and pass motions like this. We just have to wait and > see when FSFE makes an official publication on their web site, they > have a Transparency page for things like this. It says "confidential" so it is not transparent. That document leaked that is confidential shows that people having access to such document do not approve of the actions in that document. Question is if it is legal to distribute, but now when it is out, it shall be out. I am not getting the logics of FSFE board to place "confidential" stamp on any document of such organization that is supposed to be transparent. The fact that FSFE says here: https://fsfe.org/about/transparency-commitment.html As part of its initiative “transparent civil society”, Transparency International Germany provides a guide on how to make a transparency commitment. This page guides you to the relevant information on our website. Name, place, address, founding year. Full constitution, minutes from the annual assemblies, information about concrete goals and how we want to reach them. where they mention "minutes of annual minutes" BUT COMPLETELY AVOID MENTIONING OTHER EVEN MORE IMPORTANT DECISIONS -- is evidence that they are NOT TRANSPARENT. And that they are intentionally not transparent. Condition is that document shown is genuine. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: FSFE minutes, or a vendetta?
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-18 01:28]: > The second document also appears to contain two resignation emails. > I've heard that there have actually been more resignations than > that. So you also say that those could be real. I have published few pages: https://pleroma.gnusocial.club/notice/9o1eDIfG9fZIxb2zLM on FSFE social account, nobody yet answered anything. The stamp "CONFIDENTIAL" is not real, it is placed there digitally. But could be anything. The stamp DRAFT looks more real. That knife is there, says that document was tampered by somebody. Fine. But overall it looks genuine. However, the writings and changes of Articles are carefully edited and they cannot be fake. The changes mentioned in overall document are consistent with each other. That looks as real document to me. > Ultimately, the authenticity of either document can't be confirmed > unless they are published by FSFE. Otherwise it could be fake news. It could be, but then it would be wasted for what reason? To attack your writings? I don't think so. I do not know that you said anything so bad that somebody starts writing this type of document and making it fake issue. It would look so genuine and then again wasted effort. It is not balanced. I think that is real draft. But what is real decision, I do not know. I have seen many fake documents in last 17 years, and I can spot things. I think this is genuine draft. > If FSFE was to publish a set of minutes containing a malicious and > abusive act of character assassination then it would create a lot of > problems. They did not mean to publish it. I am sure that they have many other decisions which are not transparently published. Obviously they publish only annual meetings. But what about the "annualy made decisions" - those are not published. Thus there is no transparency in FSFE. > If they are authentic, which we don't know, then the conduct of rogue > individuals at the annual meeting is extraordinarily abusive. But which one? > Even without those circumstances, no organization would pass such a > motion in a public meeting and record it in their minutes. It was not "public" meeting. You should know it better if you were in the FSFE. If you know at least one decision that was not published online, then you know that this is possible. > Such matters are usually handled discretely by the executive and > under proper legal advice. Document looks like they wanted to handle it discreetly. Even if fake, it is time NOW to publish that document. > The motion in these potentially fake minutes doesn't look like the > work of a lawyer, it looks like a vendetta sketched on the back of a > napkin. I have worked with lawyers, the minutes are minutes, everybody can write it, but the modifications in Articles look as carefully drafted. > The only thing for FSFE to do right now is to confirm that those > documents are fake and that no such motions were passed at the annual > meeting. Can you ask them? I am asking them. -- Thanks, Jean Louis ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: FSFE minutes, or a vendetta?
* Roland Häder [2019-10-18 02:21]: > I like your statements a lot as I tend to speak the truth over lies out > and I may include horse and rider, means responsible persons in it. > But one thing starts anoying here and that is this constant attacks on > FSF/E/A (and maybe not limited to them). I'm a recurring anually donor > and I keep it as long as I can effort, so I'm a FSFE member. But this > campaigning is in some way hilarious to me simply because what the > main goal of the FSF/E/A is, the spread use use free-libre open source > software (FLOSS). That is fine for you and your viewpoint. Issue with free speech: === The issue is defaming RMS over free speech. He did nothing illegal. He is founder of GNU project and the FSF, and FSFE would not exist without him. Joining in defamation of RMS is disgraceful. I am not member of the FSFE, but for as long as present President remains same, and same people, I would not donate anything to FSFE for that reason of denying free speech and taking rumor mongering biased side. If we are talking about freedom zero, that software shall be used by whomever for whatever reason, we are talking also about free speech in the first place. If we are talking about the free speech than there shall be no Thoughtpolice in free software movement. That is contradictory to each other. Can it be simpler? I expect from any free software organization to first respect free speech of everbody. And I expect that they fight for users' freedom in computing and software. The issue is: one cannot promote freedom zero by shutting the mouth of different-thinking people whoever they may be in the community. RMS is in fact quite a strong person to resist all the slander. But there are other people who would not even raise their voice and would simply disappear from community. If then fighting for freedom zero that EVERYBODY CAN USE SOFTWARE FOR WHATEVER REASON -- that is serious free speech issue, and only people who never thought about it, they will never understand it. We are fighting for good and bad people, irrelevant of their political views, to use software how they wish. In very bad extremist viewpoint, that would mean that free software could be used to damage humanity, even terrorists could use free software, thus also people with negative views, positive views, nazis, and anti-nazis, fashists, and anti-fashists, communists, and for Trump and Angela Merkel to use it how they wish, IRRELEVANT to opinions or political views of those people. Thus we are promoting freedom zero in the first place as free speech. Thus we cannot bash on the founder for his personal viewpoints which were anywhere never the point of GNU community. There is big difference if money is to be spent to organization that is truly transparent and truly pushes free software furtherance or if money will be spent to organization that pretends to be transparent, but is not. See how money is spent, here is example: On this page: https://fsfe.org/about/about.en.html There is statement: "To be an independent voice for Free Software, we depend on your donation. See how we use our funds and who donates to us." linking to: https://fsfe.org/about/funds/funds.en.html where I can see following: 2017542,772.73 447,394.08 linking to: Income and Expenses 2017 Income EUR Donations1 198,820.36 Supporter contributions and membership fees 208,581.31 Paid services 107,783.06 Merchandise 28,580.78 Interest and currency exchange gains7.22 Total income543,772.73 ExpensesEUR Basic infrastructure costs2 142,724.77 Public awareness3 116,770.30 Community support 1,641,50 Legal work 83,132.44 Policy work 76.760,25 FOSS4SMEs project 2.939,16 Merchandise 23,425,66 Total expenses 447,394.08 Surplus 96,378.65 I am sorry, but that is not telling me "how funds are used". That is maybe enough for children, not enough for me. What means "basic infrastructure costs"? If FSFE is truly transparent then why not publish the full balance sheet? What means "legal work"? Who exactly was paid among those attorneys? It is less transparent than any government that I know! "Open Source" issue: Other issues are staying truthful to original ideas of free software philosophy. Organization like FSF is not same as FSFE. FSF is not same as GNU. While it was same before, it is not same now. There are serious differences in promoting true free software philosophy or promoting "open source". There is difference between people promoting free software philosophy and people programming free software. Or people who are putting it all together in one box. It is not same, small details are making the difference. There are issues and there are differences, see: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html Driving people to use non-free software: Every page of FSFE.org
Re: A use for sockpuppets and trolls
* Lori Nagel [2019-10-23 02:56]: > It is time to movepast the controversies and discuss the real > issues, the issue of howto be more effective as free software > advocates. Very good initiative! As free software philosophy is freely licensed to spread and duplicate, every individual loyal to free software philosophy may advocate and bring understanding to own friends and society in general. Articles are free to duplicate and place on your own websites. It is very beneficial to speak about free software philosophy in universities, schools and people's universities. Agenda for such presentation could be as simple as: 1. Who is Dr. Richard Stallman? 2. What is GNU Project? 3. What are 4 software freedoms and what are users' human rights in computing. 4. Where such freedoms are defined, in the GPL license. 5. Examples of great free software projects 6. Distribution and duplication of DVDs with free operating system distributions. 7. Making your own GNU Friends Club in your community and helping others to liberate computers from proprietary software, including liberating their Linux kernels from proprietary blobs. The above agenda is simple and can be presented within 15 minutes, everybody may do it in their own community. > Free software activists should go into the enemy territory and post > messages aboutwhy xyz piece of proprietary software is bad. In general ANY proprietary software is bad for reason of being proprietary. Free software movement is about free software and liberation. "Open source" is movement of people who rather advocate better software quality, not quite freedoms, it is mixture of people who understand free software and those who simply appreciate that software is there for use. We are friends. People from "open source" are rather to speak about qualities of software. While those from free software movement will speak about freedom. That is the difference and for this reason all proprietary software has no place on this planet as all of such software are abusing human rights. > They should do so in groups going into the same community so that it > isn’t just one lone voice who is a troll. You are right. That is how many social actions are spread and disseminated. Yet strength of the free software philosophy is that people adopt it individually and spread it individually. Before some time, maybe few years, I have seen some commotion when GNU was mentioned as true name of system with explanation that "Linux" is a kernel and not the operating system. Today I see not much of turmoil on that subject and the facts are accepted as such, and people support GNU and GNU project and getting the facts. > Non-technical users do not have to settle for DRM or take it when a > proprietary software company takes their software and community out > from under them. Many people hate thesethings but take it with some > kind of acceptance, like it is a fact oflife like eating or > breathing air. It is not and the proprietary software industry does > not have to exist. Proprietary software is set of hidden commands which one cannot know what they are doing to you. And the fact is that society have been manipulated by using proprietary software, series of hidden commands that manipulate users' data, users' rights in computing. For those who know what proprietary software does, it is kind of masochism without sex. For those who are not aware of problems with proprietary software, they can be enlightened. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: A use for sockpuppets and trolls
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-23 03:33]: > What is "community action"? For me, after FSFE decided to abolish > elections, forking the mailing list was a legitimate and proportionate > form of community action. A few people unsubscribed but the vast > majority remain interested in hearing the points of view that other > communities censor. There can be issue about "data collection". Everybody that is exposing their email address into mailing list is already interested in the subject, even if those are opposing views. It is social activity and cannot be considered commercial activity. Question is if one is free to obtain and collect email address that is already written on Internet and exposed to public. This may be one point that somebody could call "illegal", and I think it would not pass. But Germany and German courts could have different views on "data collection". I hope that no legal attack comes from the FSFE against you. FSFE itself is not a sister organization of FSF. They are though using same name, same "brand" in that regards. > It is interesting to note that FSFE keeps giving people condescending > messages about how being a member of FSFE e.V. is not important for > volunteers, the e.V and the bank account are just some little legal > constructs in the corner that nobody needs to know about. But when the > mailing list was forked, they squeal like stuck pigs and insist that > FSFE e.V. owns the list. They can't have it both ways. I'm happy to > expose their hypocrisy. If that is so, those activities look as corrupt activities. When I say "corrupt" then I mean corrupt to the true ideals of free software philosophy, due to probable money motivation, power or sphere of influence through "official" organization. Everybody can make their own organizations. The difference is in money. Who has the money can influence more and take and gain more control. Yet all those issues are totally apart from ideology and represent in my view deviation from building and promoting free operating systems and free software. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: FWIW: gnu-misc-disc...@gnu.org is premoderated
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-31 09:19]: > Is the FSF giving the FSFE credit for this wonderful idea, censoring the > free software community? > > https://debian.community/safety-or-a-fake-community/ Ha haha, yes. That is exactly how it looks to me. But I do not think thate "Mob Justice Warriors" also known as SJW are connected to each other. It is more like a hive, they are acting by emotions, which are in itself vibrations, similarly like bees are acting to dances. There need not be any logic or fact, if somebody is offended, they will claim it was offensive. Even though statement need not be offensive for somebody to get offended. How to Use Cancel Culture to DESTROY Anyone You Disagree With in 3 Easy Steps!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agIIDGRspKY The vibration or "honey pot" for those bees is that it is "justified" to "mob rule" somebody "down" for reasons of their feelings what is "politically correct". Unlike Tony Blair's New Labour, I think those are just connected by emotions, seeing others that dramatization is "fine and just" those "bees" dramatize themselves. Stopping dramatization is not a solution to it. It should be the last resort, like when defending safety. True solution to dramatizations is to listen to people and talk to them. Communication is a solution. ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Events against RMS
* Adrienne G. Thompson [2019-09-23 21:21]: > For more insight on the subversive infiltration of Free Software by > Corporate giants, read Daniel's blog piece on: > "Google, Money and Censorship in Free Software Communities" Jul 17, 2019 > https://danielpocock.com/google-money-censorship-free-software/ Back in time, 10 years ago, there was attack from Microsoft, also related to bring Stallman down and it was also related to similar issues. I am sorry not having the link ready. On September 4th 2019, RMS visited Microsoft Research and gave a speech. Shortly after, September 11th 2019, Selam's article appeared on medium.com It appears not related. Chronologically it makes sense as events follow the events in the same manner as before 10 years. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: how the RMS / FSF coup was exposed
* Christian Imhorst [2019-09-23 17:47]: > Dear Daniel, > > > Am 23. September 2019 18:32:50 MESZ schrieb Daniel Pocock pocock.pro>: > >on FSF mailing lists, "we are now having to review posts before they > >are > >distributed". Clearly, posts which don't suit the narrative of the > >coup, like mine, will not get through. > > that's because you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. > > I am glad that Stallman is no longer president of the FSF. I hope > they will find someone who will represent our hopefully more diverse > movement better. It is wrong. FSF was and has legal obligation to remain apolitical. GNU project was never discriminatory and shall remain apolitical. No feminism politics or any other kind of politics are allowed in GNU project. Your opinion will be valid when you do some of free software speeches like RMS is doing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCh8EcBrptA As you are doing that from fsfe.org email address now I consider FSFE politically biased, taking stances in politics other than free software and thus not true to free software philosophy. FSFE cannot be trusted for reasons of supporting the apolitical GNU free software philosophy. It can be trusted by people who support their different politics, but not true free software activists who guard freedom zero for software to be used by everybody. FSFE cannot be trusted to promote free software for everybody when having staff members or members using their official domain fsfe.org to take political stances. Jean ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: [Backtotheaugust] I wish to support RMS
* Scott [2019-10-13 00:03]: > Scott Monahan, a user of GNU/Linux. Thank you for defense of RMS and that includes GNU and FSF too. I do not know of any evidence that somebody in FSF is doing something wrong against the GNU or RMS, if anybody knows, please show me links. Let me give you summary of what happened: 1. Person accused RMS of issues not related to GNU or FSF, related to jokes like abort() jokes, related to his statements which were logical and nothing bad. Even if his statements would be bad for majority of people, those are not related to free software foundation. See references below. My Thoughts on the Richard Stallman "Scandal" by Jacob https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGF17TbbBcE https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ 2. Few of people in GNU project have made statement that supports feminism politics and have published it on the GNU project pages, in particular on Guix: https://guix.gnu.org/ They have tried to hide the feminism agenda on that page, but they have openly said it on their IRC log, see evidences on http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log and http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-08.log by searching for words "abort" and "virgin" jokes and "MIT". Basically, without public discussion, without verification of facts, they are abusing GNU project pages and trying to introduce feminism politics into GNU project. 3. People protest against it and make various comments and remarks. The basis of GNU project is that it is for everybody, it shall be apolitical, because as soon as any politics is introduced, it is dividing the community. We are together in community for reasons of free software philosophy as that is planetarry common goal for GNU and free software activists. Feminism or introduction of any politics into the independent and apolitical GNU project is obviously dividing the community as we are not supposed to be identified within GNU project by our political opinion, but by our activism to free software. The only politics that GNU project shall push is free software activism. We shall be friends in GNU project for reasons of having GNU as common. And not for reasons if we agree to feminism or not agree to feminism or any other politics beyond GNU project, at that moment it becomes politics beyond free software. Sadly nobody from FSF realizes what means division of community and nobody is acting upon it publicly that I know or can see. My suggestion is that you rethink about all that and decide yourself if introduction of any other politics is good or not good for GNU and FSF, and then to write to following email addresses with your opinion: To FSF: fsf-and-...@fsf.org and to GNU: gnu-and-...@gnu.org and express your opinion. Jean Louis P.S. How does Dr. Richard Stallman lead GNU Project? Dr. Richard Stallman contacts opinion leaders and forwards free software: https://www.zdnet.com/article/free-software-advocate-richard-stallman-spoke-at-microsoft-research-this-week/ He teaches the world on free software: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCh8EcBrptA Dr. Richard Stallman provides policies and planning for GNU project, and he has done so successfuly for many years. ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: Events against RMS
* Adrienne G. Thompson [2019-10-13 01:24]: > I need to learn more. Please try to remember and find some links. > > Thank You > Adrienne https://web.archive.org/web/20090711081118/http://opensourcetogo.blogspot.com:80/2009/07/emailing-richard-stallman.html That is one link, but not the one which I wanted to send you, basically same thing was used against RMS, and it happened after his soon outing to Microsoft, similarly like this time, and for same reasons of Emacs Virgin joke. JL ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: censorship alternatives (was: Re: )
* Daniel Pocock [2019-10-14 21:29]: > I started thinking that maybe some of this could be done with a > Thunderbird plugin, managing a BCC list in any block chain or > distributed data structure. Plugin would make it centralized and locked to Thunderbird. Email system would make it decentralized. > - does the data structure store the list of subscribers or the > actual messages or both? It should store the list of subscribers from the point of subscribing to the point of unsubscribing. > - how do people add and remove themselves? I suspect this won't be > completely immune to abuse, some users could potentially hang on to > the addresses of people who unsubscribe. Just as usual. No change in email system. > - which headers does the plugin need to set, e.g. just the List-Id > - header? It should not be a plugin. But headers of the email shall contain direct link to full threads by using email ID. > - how to handle bounces? If related to list, it should be recorded that it was bounce. It should not deviate from email standards, it should just make proper recordings, which means that when email arrives, that should be recorded first, before being distributed further. But what you cannot change is human nature. Jean -- Thank you, Jean Louis Tanzanite Apollo Limited https://www.tanzaniteapollo.com Tanzanite, Tsavorite, Chrysoberyl, Moonstone, Acquamarine, you name it. Gemstone polishing factory direct from source of Tanzanite in Mirerani Town, 68 km from vulcano Kilimanjaro. To reach the office phone number please dial: +255-626-100-000 for all types of gemstones available for export. ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
