Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-12-11 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/11/09 7:12 AM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: Stormy, we seem to be miscommunicating. I said that people should not promote non-free software on Planet GNOME. You seem to be arguing against something different. I believe Stormy was quite clear and on point: It sounded to me as

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-12-11 Thread Lefty ( )
Philip van Hoof writes I propose to have a vote on GNOME's membership to the GNU project. I'd second this. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-12-11 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/11/09 8:40 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: Don't we have more concrete issues to address? We _were_ attempting to finalize a Code of Conduct which could be provided to speakers, in the hope of avoiding future instances of the sort of harmless fun we experienced during Mr.

Re: foundation-list Digest, Vol 68, Issue 13

2009-12-13 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/13/09 7:24 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan cia...@member.fsf.org wrote: That's a rule (a policy), which is mild and doesn't involve jumping straight to blocking a whole blog. And it was suggested in heated opposition to this comment: No, Ciaran: you've removed the entire surrounding context, and

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-12-13 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/13/09 8:22 AM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: Unable to come up with and too dumb are your own additions, which clearly were not present in the events themselves. Clearly, a lot of misunderstanding was present in the events themselves. To what do you attribute this wide-spread

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-12-13 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/13/09 8:22 AM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: That's where the cash for things like my FSF-E Fellowship, EFF membership, Creative Commons membership, etc., come from, see? These are worthy causes, but I would not encourage anyone to use non-free software even to get

Re: foundation-list Digest, Vol 68, Issue 13

2009-12-13 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/13/09 8:49 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan cia...@member.fsf.org wrote: Yes. You said that no one's yet demonstrated a problem, and you gave a solution for if the problem was demonstrated. You're solution was 100% compatible with Richard's solution. Except that we now seem to have had the

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-12-13 Thread Lefty ( )
In the interests of a broader collection of data, I've shelled out of my own pocket to set up a professional-level SurveyMonkey account (the use of which I will happily share with the Foundation, at least until the annual subscription runs out, if it wishes to conduct surveys of its own). I've

Re: Private Foundation-List Petition for referendum

2009-12-14 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/14/09 7:14 PM, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier j...@zonker.net wrote: 2009/12/14 Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com: Are there people on this list that are not GNOME Foundation members? If so, can you speak up? It would be good for everyone to know why you subscribe to foundation-list and the

Re: Private Foundation-List Petition for referendum

2009-12-14 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/14/09 11:35 PM, Sergey Panov si...@sipan.org wrote: Nothing personal, but I never trusted those corporate Open Source Advocates ... . No offense taken, I'm sure... I fear you distrust a fair proportion of the Foundation's Advisory Board. Besides, Lefty does not work for ACCESS Inc.

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2009-12-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/13/09 8:22 AM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: ...I would not encourage anyone to use non-free software even to get money to give to a worthy cause. I apologize to all, but given this, there's a question that _really_ has to be asked: Given the proposition that proprietary

Re: Private Foundation-List Petition for referendum

2009-12-16 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/15/09 1:25 PM, Miguel de Icaza mig...@novell.com wrote: Perhaps what we do need is for the board to have a stronger connection to mass media and be ready to articulate public responses properly framing discussions and correcting any incorrect reporting. Actually, this is something

Re: Private Foundation-List Petition for referendum

2009-12-16 Thread Lefty ( )
should probably collect a list of those who are willing (and able). On 12/16/09 3:51 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: Hi, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote: On 12/15/09 1:25 PM, Miguel de Icaza mig...@novell.com wrote: Perhaps what we do need is for the board to have a stronger connection to mass

Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
Thanks to Bruno and the rest of the Membership team. It pleases me for some reason to be on the same list of new members as my friend, Jim Vasile. On a different matter, I am currently conducting a brief ( 5 minute) survey on attitudes and viewpoints on FLOSS and proprietary software and I invite

Re: Code of Conduct and Foundation membership

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 12/15/09 4:09 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) zee...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: Hi, Lefty wrote: Given the proposition that proprietary software is illegitimate, and the statement above, do you believe that the GNOME Foundation and

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 5:38 AM, Xavier Bestel xavier.bes...@free.fr wrote: Giving one definition of a word, then asking if someone else's sentence containing that word is true is at best partial. Xavier, without defining the term beforehand, I'd be open instead to accusations that I wasn't being fair

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 8:34 AM, Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com wrote: The GNOME Foundation believes in free software and promotes free software but that does not mean that GNOME is anti-proprietary software. We believe, promote, use and write free software. We are excited when companies and

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 8:49 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote: I fully agree with this statement if you replace free software with open source. I have some sympathy with this view. Open source is my preference as well and (based on the survey data) seems to have broader uptake among the

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 9:45 AM, Philip Van Hoof pvanh...@gnome.org wrote: I think it's a great idea to (at least) use both. I'd favor this as well. What it gains in possible awkwardness (which doesn't bother me, I used to say free and open source software all the time) it also gains in clarity, I think.

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 10:01 AM, David Schlesinger le...@shugendo.org wrote: Free software isn't a synonym for open source, and by only using 'free software' you aren't including all the OSI definitions which GNOME also endorses. This is actually an excellent, and an important, point. Having poked

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 10:10 AM, Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com wrote: I have no objections to free and open source other than it's awkwardness. (I too have used it quite a bit.) As I point out in my previous message, I¹d say we have to use it, awkward or not.

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 9:57 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: Please stop trolling. Dave, I think this is unhelpful. If you must, maybe you should do it privately, rather than publicly. How about I do a poll whether people think PCs should run Windows or another desktop environment? If we respect

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 11:10 AM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote: We certainly all know that RMS believes that. Some other GNOME community members may as well, though probably not a large number. It, is however, your choice to focus on it, and I don't understand what you are trying to achieve by

My Apologies to Owen

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
I inadvertently replied publicly to what had been a private message from Owen, and for that, I apologize. It was accidental, and I apologized to Owen offline as soon as he pointed my error out to me. As I was getting ready to send it off, I noticed that Owen was the sole recipient, assumed I'd

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 1:05 PM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: 2. not legitimate; not sanctioned by law or custom. I don't see what the fuss is about. I don't know that there _is_ a fuss. That's one of the things I hope to determine via the survey. Not sanctioned by custom precisely

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 1:22 PM, Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com wrote: I think you may be reading quite a bit more into this than I'd intended. Do you have an objection to the questions in the survey simply being _asked_, Owen...? It's very hard not to take the survey as a continuation of the recent

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 1:58 PM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: So proposing that GNOME as a project adopt one or the other amounts to a troll, in that it will create an endless discussion with no result. Well, I'll be sure not to propose that, then. Again, my impression has been that there are

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 1:58 PM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: Having gone through 10 years of Open Source vs Free Software debates, I know that (like emacs vs vim, bsd vs linux, gnome vs kde, bsd vs gpl, reply-to for mailing lists, code indentation styles, and other religious debates) that nothing

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-15 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/15/10 3:17 PM, Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com wrote: I disagree quite strongly. Fair enough, let me be clearer: my stated views do not necessarily represent the views of the GNOME Foundation or the GNOME community. GNOME comprises a variety of viewpoints, of which mine is one;

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-16 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/16/10 1:10 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html for an explanation of the difference in philosophy between free software and open source. I'm pretty sure most people on the list have read the essay and understand

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/17/10 6:52 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan cia...@member.fsf.org wrote: GNOME has a policy (written or not) that prohibits importing non-free software into its repositories. I'm not personally aware of a written policy to this effect. If there's an unwritten policy, I'd encourage the Board to write

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/17/10 12:48 PM, Shaun McCance sha...@gnome.org wrote: To the best of my knowledge, that policy has never been written down. That is because there is and always has been a very, very, very clear and common understanding that this is the policy. It takes almost willful ignorance of our

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/17/10 12:37 PM, Luis Villa l...@tieguy.org wrote: To the best of my knowledge, that policy has never been written down. That is because there is and always has been a very, very, very clear and common understanding that this is the policy. It takes almost willful ignorance of our

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/17/10 5:20 PM, Luis Villa l...@tieguy.org wrote: The FSF is welcome to give their advice; and should be treated with respect when they do give it, the same as anyone else. This is particularly true in this area, where we know we are walking a difficult line between freedom and

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-17 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/17/10 9:30 PM, Jonathon Jongsma jonat...@quotidian.org wrote: As far as I an tell, there has been essentially no controversy whatsoever about any of this until you and Philip seemingly started trying to drum one up. What exactly are you even trying to change? Is there an official GNOME

Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

2010-01-18 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/18/10 2:32 PM, Dominic Lachowicz domlachow...@gmail.com wrote: Can someone please fix that? Perhaps it would be sufficient to link to the FSF's list of GPL-compatible licenses and recommended documentation licenses? That would clear up any possible confusion. I gathered from what J5

Re: GNU hackers meeting GUADEC 2011 colocation?

2010-01-26 Thread Lefty ( )
On 1/26/10 4:56 PM, Andrew Cowie and...@operationaldynamics.com wrote: On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 21:43 +0100, Andy Wingo wrote: (/me thinks of Vilanova) Which was a bloody awesome GUADEC, in no small measure because of the Ice Cream shop, and fluendo's Beach Party. They're _all_ awesome, but

Re: Survey: GUADEC and Akadamy co-location in 2011

2010-02-01 Thread Lefty ( )
On 2/1/10 8:11 AM, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote: ...I'll just publish what I have and the raw results, so people could take a look and produce more interesting stats. Sounds like the open source way. =) ___ foundation-list mailing list

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

2010-02-22 Thread Lefty ( )
On 2/22/10 11:27 AM, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: * It seems we have lost the mobile battle. Can we do something about it or simply retreat?. I like the idea of creating more components and some of this components can be added to the GNOME mobile platform. Have we lost the mobile

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

2010-02-22 Thread Lefty ( )
I hesitate to reopen this discussion, frankly. Look at the archives for December and January. On 2/22/10 1:12 PM, Alberto Ruiz ar...@gnome.org wrote: 2010/2/22 Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org: Well, we've certainly managed to place GNOME at an enormous disadvantage with respect

Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

2010-02-28 Thread Lefty ( )
Okay, I had hoped this might simply die out, but instead, it's becoming increasingly absurd as well as increasingly personal in tone. First, Philip didn't ask anyone to stop saying things, he expressed some dismay at what was being said, and not without reason. Beyond the suggestion‹which Philip

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-04 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/4/10 5:46 AM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: If everything gets done inside or through your browser, it would make toolkits such as GTK and desktop environments such as GNOME obsolete, except as platforms for a browser. And if everything gets done on your desktop, it would make

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-04 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/4/10 7:22 AM, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier j...@zonker.net wrote: Somewhere in there should be a self-sustaining model to raise money for the hosting and GNOME, and provide Free as in Freedom services for users in the bargain... It's a nice idea, but I don't see any self-sustaining model

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-04 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/4/10 9:07 AM, Gian Mario Tagliaretti gia...@gnome.org wrote: On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote: But, just so I'm sure I'm clear here, Mr. Stallman, it's my understanding that you don't even actually _use_ the web, in any realistic sense, relying

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-04 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/4/10 6:08 PM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote: On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 17:45 -0800, Lefty (石鏡 ) wrote: In any case, I'm under the impression that a search warrant or similar order is generally required in the US to get information regardless of whether it's from a hosted service

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-05 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/4/10 10:32 PM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote: Well, given this wide coverage, which I've somehow completely missed, there shouldn't be much challenge to your producing an actual citation I was a little looser than I should have been in my wording. Oh, indeed? For media

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-05 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/5/10 8:18 AM, Ciaran O'Riordan cia...@member.fsf.org wrote: Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org writes: the answer is [] not [] :avoid anything that runs on a server. No one's suggested that. Let's not be in a rush to invite users to use servers -- even our own -- instead of their own

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-05 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/5/10 8:44 AM, David Schlesinger le...@shugendo.org wrote: If everything gets done inside or through your browser, it would make toolkits such as GTK and desktop environments such as GNOME obsolete, except as platforms for a browser. Just so we're completely clear here, I'd suggest that

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-05 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/5/10 9:19 AM, Jonathon Jongsma jonat...@quotidian.org wrote: With all of the recent comments about how horrible foundation-list has become, and how people are unsubscribing because of endless and pointless argumentation, you *still* can't get yourself to refrain from adding more and more

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-05 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/5/10 9:55 AM, Stormy Peters stormy.pet...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Lefty (石鏡 ) le...@shugendo.org wrote: Perhaps it would have been better if someone from the Board had responded to the initial message from Mr. Stallman with regard to Facebook, saying 1

Re: Reboot: Strategic goals for GNOME

2010-03-05 Thread Lefty ( )
On 3/5/10 10:18 AM, Miguel de Icaza mig...@novell.com wrote: I could help Richard and we could work together, but he has decided that I am a traitor of the movement. Thanks for posting this, Miguel. It would seem to confirm that I'm not incorrect in finding this baffling. As someone who's

FW: Candidacy: Seif Lotfy

2010-06-01 Thread Lefty ( )
Sorry, reply rather than reply all... -- Forwarded Message From: David Schlesinger le...@shugendo.org Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 08:39:59 -0700 To: Iain i...@gnome.org Conversation: Candidacy: Seif Lotfy Subject: Re: Candidacy: Seif Lotfy On 6/1/10 7:38 AM, Iain i...@gnome.org wrote:

Re: Question for Bastian Nocera

2010-06-18 Thread Lefty ()
(By the same token, if this particular bit of self-congratulatory revisionism is suddenly fair game, I'd obviously be interested in knowing that as well.) -- Sent from my iPod ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 2:21 AM, Patryk Zawadzki pat...@pld-linux.org wrote: It would be better if GNOME defined a precise set of rules (ie. don't mention religion). As for the hazy areas, common sense is a better judge than a set of written rules. If someone does something grossly inappropriate just

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 8:41 AM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: That's completely irrelevant. Do we need to write a list of no bag stealing, no puppy strangling etc.? Sexual assaults are supposed to be dealt with using law enforcement, not speaker guidelines. No, because coming up with a

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 1:57 PM, Brian Cameron brian.came...@oracle.com wrote: {a completely sensible response} Thanks, Brian. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 3:06 PM, Sergey Panov si...@sipan.org wrote: Exactly! For instance, I am offended almost every time Lefty or Philip Van Hoof say something ... almost anything nowdays. - Perhaps you should find some other mailing list to read if you're finding this one that distressing. It's

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 8:30 AM, Patryk Zawadzki pat...@pld-linux.org wrote: I bet at least one person in the audience is offended when they see the presenter using a Mac. Or sporting a Windows t-shirt. Or using an iPod. Or mentioning that Apple did something better than GNOME. Security, seize and

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 3:39 PM, David Schlesinger le...@shugendo.org wrote: ( http://identi.ca/notice/6304540)... Do men really think RMSs virgin joke at #gcds was not sexist? Very disappointed in FLOSS comm chatter about this. By the way: Celeste wrote this while sitting in the auditorium at GCDS,

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 3:50 PM, Brian Cameron brian.came...@oracle.com wrote: If it isn't clear already, the Speaker Guidelines are not intended to be used in frivolous ways. It's certainly seems clear enough to me. It appeared, though, to be unclear to Patryk. If people think that this needs to be

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 4:15 PM, David Schlesinger le...@shugendo.org wrote: On 6/25/10 3:50 PM, Brian Cameron brian.came...@oracle.com wrote: I can't imagine that anybody would take a complaint about someone giving a talk and using a MacBook seriously, unless the situation were somehow extraordinary

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-25 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/25/10 4:25 PM, Joanmarie Diggs joanmarie.di...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with this: I also don't think the ending is appropriate: These guidelines do not constitute censorship since you have many other forums and opportunities to say whatever you wish. I pretty much agree with _you_.

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-26 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/26/10 7:09 AM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote: The GNOME speaker guidelines were at least partly a reaction to my Saint IGNUcius comedy routine. So if I don't have a beef with these guidelines, why should anyone else? Good question. It seems some folks are intent on defending you,

One _Final_ Comment (Seriously)

2010-06-26 Thread Lefty ( )
I'm actually pretty bored by the completely futile rehashing of the same ground on this matter, over and over, to no resolution. Clearly, RMS will never feel anything other than proud about his ridicule of religion and women. Clearly, Patryk and like-minded others, will never change their minds

Re: GNOME Speaker Guidelines

2010-06-26 Thread Lefty ( )
On 6/26/10 5:45 PM, Stormy Peters sto...@gnome.org wrote: On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Stone Mirror le...@shugendo.org wrote: Again, very well said, and I couldn't agree more. Thank you, Alan. It honestly baffles me that some people seem to have such difficulty grasping what seems so