Hi Benjamin,
You raise an interesting point.
Back when I was freelancing as an audio engineer I used to pay for this
kind of cover myself and it costed around £130 a year for an individual.
The work I do for my charity (Scottish based) is covered by the charity as
are our disclosures (for
I do not think Jan is thinking coherently on this (and likewise I
absolutely empathise with your concerns Benjamin) Civil law is not black
and white and it is totally by landmark cases of which there are none to
refer to in this case that we know of. Ultimately, none of us know if the
wording on
I highly doubt being an OPW mentor will increase the likelihood of my
ending up in court.
I think that is not in question here. The point is that if a big
organisation who can afford to get sued is not willing to take a risk, why
should an individual volunteer be *explicitly* asked to do
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Karen Sandler ka...@punkrocklawyer.com
wrote:
On 2014-11-10 05:45, Magdalen Berns wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Karen Sandler ka...@punkrocklawyer.com
wrote:
On 2014-11-09 20:23, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 18:48 +
At last count, the number was up to USD 87693.47.
It seems Shakespeare was quite wrong about the insignificance of a name,
after all... It would be great to see that money not have to go on Lawyers
fees, I must say. One has to wonder why they didn't just use a trademark
search first and why
Oh dear.
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Fabiano Fidêncio fabi...@fidencio.org
wrote:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:24 AM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Fabiano Fidêncio fabi...@fidencio.org
wrote:
Can you be more explicit about what you
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote:
Are we considering not linking to this fundraiser because it is hosted
on a
website that uses non-free software?
That depends what you mean by considering.
Several people are arguing vigorously against that idea,
The issue at hand is what to say to the public.
Which is a policy issue... GNOME are responsible for establishing its
policies and GNOME has not seen fit to establish any concrete policy on
this (for whatever reason). Not establishing concrete policy and guidance
to cover these sorts of
Karen, Marina:
Can you elaborate on your plans for OP? It seems unclear whether you
intend
to continue to lean on the infrastructure of larger organisations like
GNOME
or SFC or whether you intend to create a concrete autonomous model for
OP in
the long run and these things are
Karen, Marina:
Can you elaborate on your plans for OP? It seems unclear whether you intend
to continue to lean on the infrastructure of larger organisations like
GNOME or SFC or whether you intend to create a concrete autonomous model
for OP in the long run and these things are just necessary
+1
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Oliver Propst oliver.pro...@gmail.com
wrote:
I hope a board member step-up and sign the agreement for GNOME.
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de
wrote:
Hi.
On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 11:51:41AM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
I suggest we just make the rules much clearer to people on the outreach
pages by clarifying what non-trivial actually means. GSoC/OPW interns
are
told to make more contributions after their 3 month internship before
applying. That suggests that the contributions they make over their 3
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 20:54 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
On 02/12/2015 07:33 PM, Cosimo Cecchi wrote:
I think you bring up an interesting point, but I also like the idea
that foundation membership is not a badge
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org wrote:
On Fri, 2015-02-13 at 09:46 +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Germán Poo-Caamaño g...@gnome.org
wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 20:54 -0800, Christian Hergert wrote:
On 02/12/2015 07
What you are suggesting would be accepting every single intern
regardless of this person being really interested and passionate about
joining the Foundation. That will probably lead to a wider membership
base for sure but how long these people are going to really stay
around if their
A while back we ran a $20K privacy campaign. A while later there was a
discussion about what to do with the funds. Did we ever decide what to
do with these?
Nope.
I proposed to fund interns to work on security and privacy related projects
but the idea was rejected.
This seems like a
If you have a concrete reason why it does help to continue to ignore
bylaws
that are inconvenient for whatever is more convenient, then you are
free
to
make a case for that. California law probably would probably override
that
idea, though.
I tried to nicest way to
One of the main requirements of gaining
Foundation Membership is being active within the community for a
little while *after* the internship has ended to demonstrate the fact
there's a real interest staying around and contributing to the
Project.
This is a practice which
A while back we ran a $20K privacy campaign. A while later there was a
discussion about what to do with the funds. Did we ever decide what to
do with these?
Nope.
I proposed to fund interns to work on security and privacy related
projects
but the idea was rejected.
This seems
[...]
It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support the
hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested solution
will
address that problem in a representative way.
Please, go ahead, collect the evidence and present it here.
I am going to need
This is something I believe could happen if an amendment were to be
proposed with compelling evidence to support it so we are able to take an
informed vote on it. At the moment the issue is that a decision which
overrides the bylaws has already been made in the establishment of this
[...]
It seems proportionate to try to seek compelling evidence to support
the
hypothesis that this is a problem but also that the suggested
solution
will
address that problem in a representative way.
Please, go ahead, collect the evidence and present it here.
Hi all,
Whist this is a bit entertaining, I think we can all see where it is
headed... On balance, there really is only one practical reason to bring up
the past and that is for the sake of being able to reliably anticipate the
future. So, I have to urge people again to try to move the discussion
If crowdfunding was a service that the GNOME foundation offered it's
members, I would be in favor of that. However, as it stands today, I
believe this would cause undue burden on the board.
It's hard to say without thrashing it out but I definitely think it's worth
thrashing it out,
Define Many ? I personally support FSF's ethics in principle, please
don't speak for all of us.
I think it's somewhat split, but sort of having everyone in the foundation
state their stance on it, I don't know how 'many' could be defined.
There are people who are in a position to state
Generally I think that the people who are not on board understand what is
being discussed and simply disagree with certain aspects of it. I know that
is the case with me. I contribute to FOSS, etc, but I do not always share
the same ethics as the FSF. My impression is that that is common. We
It’s frankly pretty difficult for me at least to distinguish between
Richard-speaking-as-Richard-alone and Richard-speaking-as-the-FSF, and he
never makes the distinction himself. Does he hold some viewpoint that the
FSF does not, or vice versa? That would actually be news to me.
Define Many ? I personally support FSF's ethics in principle, please
don't speak for all of us.
I think it's somewhat split, but sort of having everyone in the foundation
state their stance on it, I don't know how 'many' could be defined.
The elected members of the Board of Directors
the officers do not strictly need to be directors, i.e. the Board may
appoint anybody to hold those offices after a vote, but it's the Board
that votes, not the general membership of the Foundation; the members
of the Foundation elect the Board, though.
I can't see any reason why that could
Hi,
At this stage, I regretfully have urge anyone who would preference lashing
out on twitter with their frustrations about the existence of this thread,
to consider engaging in a reasoned way on this dedicated thread about their
concerns. Whist throwing bigotry at me may seem like the easiest
I wasn't confused, and I wasn't speaking about the recent Groupon
fundraiser. There's been a few calls here for free software alternatives
to Indiegogo as well as GNOME becoming involved with those alternatives.
Many of the proposed alternatives were not crowdfunding and shouldn't be
I understand that you can't move the campaign now. But can you post a
bitcoin address, and invite people to send money that way if they
don't want to run nonfree JS code?
I've added a section to the campaign borrowed from crowdsupply.
It's great this is resolved.
As for bitcoin, I'm
Hi Emmanuele,
these roles already exist, and are generally assigned to the elected
directors during the first board meeting.
Seems a bit unorthodox, but as long as they're willing and able to manage
the additional workload I can't see anything wrong with that. :-)
currently, Andrea Veri is
Hi Alexandre,
No, that's not quite the same thing. Most of the core teams mentioned on
https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/ do not appear on that list.
Magdalen
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Magdalen
This is not a complicated process, it is fairly clear and transparent
(especially when compared with the alternative). What is the problem with
using It?
There is none.
At the moment we are talking about whether it is justifiable to tell all
successful interns that they are not
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:20:21AM +, Magdalen Berns wrote:
It doesn't make a difference. The bylaws are the rules which regulate the
GNOME Foundation. GNOME's bylaws state the rules on membership
eligibility
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
fill in the form describing his contributions (and possibly the name
of someone else who can support
On 12 February 2015 at 13:42, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
fill in the form
One thing I thought of would be to change the direction of the
process
to be an invitation rather than an application.
If you see someone helping, instead of pushing him to apply you could
fill in the form describing his contributions (and possibly the name
of someone else who can
This policy came about after I encouraged interns who were 2/3rd of the
way through their internship in 2012 to apply for the Foundation
membership. The membership committee preferred that interns have a chance
to figure out their level of participation in GNOME after the internship
before
Hi Richard,
I believe it is possible to view many Facebook pages without running
JS. (I am about to verify that.)
According to the libreJS plugin you pointed us to earlier on in the
discussion, all javascript that facebook tries to run, is offending. When
LibreJS blocks the scripts it
Hi Jeff,
I am genuinely not sure whether GNOME has this already but given that the
board has stated it is quite overstretched by the current workload on them.
I get the impression some tasks tend to be delegated more on a need to
know/do basis and that this may be contributing to a heavy workload
I think you have defined it well.
I would expect that these potential problem cases occur rarely.
Can you recall any others besides this one?
Some others have mentioned social networking site links e.g. facebook et
al. Though I am not sure this would apply to all of the ones listed because
Because the issue is so specific, it is ethically simple -- it's wrong
to recommend the operation if the operation requires running nonfree
software (including JS code).
That makes sense. It is a lot easier than dealing with sites that run
non-free software but who don't require it so I
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org wrote:
Now, to the subject of whether GNOME should or should not link to
non-free
websites
The expression nonfree website is one we do not use, because it is
not clear what that would mean. Web sites raise various kinds of
The issue at hand is not a matter of endorsement. At least, not in the
usual sense of the word.
I am not sure I agree.
It seems like what we are talking about here is whether or not we should be
using certain services and advertising that we use those services on GNOME
websites.
If a link
I understood you to be talking about labelling links as non-free even on
wiki pages and Planet GNOME. Were you only talking about links to
fundraising pages?
In physics, problem solving is seen as a case of starting with the most
simple model of a given system, stating assumptions to account
First, there's a lot of talk (here and the earlier thread) that loosely
equivocates fundraising with crowdfunding. They're not the same. To tell
a project that it should simply accept donations rather than use a
crowdfunding platform is a false equivocation. Crowdfunding's mixture of
The same set up as what?
Something similar to IndieGoGo.
It does not need to be similar to indieGoGo. Let's review:
GNOME is a charity. IndiGoGo is a business. They do not have the same tax
set up, no. As far as I am aware, they do not need to have the same tax set
up either. GNOME does not
Keep it simple. The point is to check whether asking for 2 extra
months of involvement to internship is based on solid ground, no only
perception or anecdotes, as you claimed it is done. The archives with
the decisions are public as well.
Sorry for prolonging this thread, but if we are
On the face of it this seems to be purely about
reducing paper work for the membership committee (i.e. fewer applications
means less work for them).
On the face of it, this statement is fairly offensive for the
membership committee.
You've read the email that Andrea sent about the
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Luciana Fujii luci...@fujii.eti.br
wrote:
- What is the impact of having people joining the Foundation and
vanishing later?
They gain voting ability when they shouldn't.
Keep it simple. The point is to check whether asking for 2 extra
months of involvement to internship is based on solid ground, no only
perception or anecdotes, as you claimed it is done. The archives with
the decisions are public as well.
Sorry for prolonging this thread, but if we are
Again, a brilliant question. On the face of it this seems to be purely
about
reducing paper work for the membership committee (i.e. fewer applications
means less work for them). However there are clearly some implications
which
affect our democratic processes. The question of whether we
The membership can correct me if I'm wrong, but one thing that's not
been said so far is that the N months before accepting a member is
not really special to interns.
Also correct.
In that case, what is the period of time is considered acceptable for
non-interns to have contributed for
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Alexandre Franke
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:
The membership can correct me if I'm
Further to that, on looking at some of the recent membership data
gathered so far with specific regard to the interns, I have to say, it
does seem like a few interns have been significantly undervaluing
their own contributions by waiting much longer to apply than seems
appropriate for
Congrats on the new job, Tobi.
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de
wrote:
Hey folks.
My affiliation has changed.
I'm now with Huawei.
Cheers,
Tobi
___
foundation-announce mailing list
Let's be real: this is pure drama and it is more than slightly ironic that
the original topic of this thread has been completely derailed by those
seeking to censor off-topic discussion...
For the record, I agree 100% with the moderators - that censorship of any
card carrying member would be
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Yosef Or Boczko yosef...@gnome.org wrote:
Hey Richard,
בתאריך ש', אפר 4, 2015 בשעה 5:47 PM, Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org כתב:
There are people on the list who do not know this. Mentioning this
point twice a year, in a short polite message, is useful and is
Hi Max,
Thanks for your questions. Responses inline:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Max sakana...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all,
First, thanks to all candidates for volunteering to the Foundation Board.
Max come from GNOME.Asia team and thanks GNOME and board support Asia.
I have 2
Great line up! Congratulations to the new set of directors. Also, well done
to everyone who kept the election interesting by getting involved. Cheers
to you and the committee for organising things as well. :D
Magdalen
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Fabiana Simões fabianapsim...@gmail.com
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your email.
The FSF has the same status; anything that's lawful for the FSF is
lawful for the GNOME Foundation too.
Does this not limit the ability of the FSF to campaign against US laws
which attack software freedom somewhat? It seems very much like legislative
changes
Hi Richard,
Thanks for the detailed response. Comments and questions inline:
Oh wait, I think I do actually see what you mean now You're
concerned
about the message we send out if we use non-free software to promote
GNOME
and things like this e.g. git servers and social
I've seen this mentioned previously on this list as well, and I'm
curious how that happened.
There is an interesting blog about these things which is worth a read
(seems a little like some rule tightening has gone on and perhaps caught a
few organisations unaware, but it's hard to say what's
Hi Josh,
And thanks for the confirmation about GNOME's status.
I doubt the information from California Department of justice is
inaccurate, but if that is the case it would be wise for us to address that
with them. What I suspect is more likely to have happened is what Karen has
suggested could
Hi Richard,
How do you suggest the GNOME Foundation could contribute more to
advance the cause of free software and users' freedom, over and above
what GNOME contributes by being useful free software?
I am not sure whether you feel I answered your question either. I think it
could be useful
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your question.
I'd like to ask the candidates, how do you think GNOME should
contribute more to the advance of free software and users' freedom in
general (in addition to being useful free software).
Too many disabled people still don’t have the luxury of being able to
Hi Karen,
Thanks for your input.
Also, we are not allowed to work for or against specific candidates
for office.
I think you are correct about this. Am I right in assuming that only
applies to political parties in the USA, then?
I don't know -- for that you should check with a
Hi Karen,
I think we signed up to the EU fix my documents initiative and I
would really hope we could continue to support work like that without
it being an issue. My guess would be that putting our name to that
sort of campaign should be okay, since advocating a legislative
amendment does
Hi Richard
There are a few subtle ways of getting the message out which we could
explore: For example, getting GNOME listed onto some popular websites
in
the UK (e.g. BBC, NHS, RNIB etc) and elsewhere, by approaching them
with up
to date instruction manuals on how to use GNOME's
Hi Richard,
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
wrote:
Hi Richard
There are a few subtle ways of getting the message out which we could
explore: For example, getting GNOME listed onto some popular websites
in
the UK (e.g. BBC, NHS, RNIB etc
Hi Marina,
Thanks for your question!
What do you think about adopting a detailed code of conduct, similar to the
one used for GUADEC 2014 [3], for all GNOME events and creating a similarly
detailed code of conduct for the GNOME community?
I hold the view that the vast majority people will
Hi Olav,
I don't follow why I'd sign something can cause legal issues for me if I
could do without that.
I am not sure why you are concerned that a community code of conduct could
cause legal issues for you, are you able to elaborate on that?
I think in the question the GNOME community vs
Hi Richard,
I agree, it is probably appropriate for those of us who have answered to
hold off on debating about CoCs for the time being. Apologies for the
noise. I'm happy to back off so other candidates can answer Marina's
question. Do carry on... :D
Magdalen
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 10:15 PM,
Hi Liam,
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 12:09 AM, Liam R. E. Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote:
On Sun, 2015-05-24 at 21:52 +0100, Magdalen Berns wrote:
Hi Andreas,
I think most of us haven't seen latest the accounts yet, but I think
it's
probably fair to assume that a war chest of ~$100,000
Hi Andreas,
Thanks for your question!
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Tobias Mueller mue...@cryptobitch.de
wrote:
Hi!
On So, 2015-05-24 at 19:23 +0200, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
What, in your mind, is the best use of these funds now? Kept as a War
Chest [2] or spent on something specific?
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org
wrote:
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 07:11:42PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
I'm entirely in favor of an improved code of conduct, both for events
and in general.
Hi Fabiana,
Great question, thanks! Response inline:
I'd like to hear your thoughts on implementing transparency and
accountability on the Board.
How transparent the work of the Board should be to Foundation members?
What should be communicated and when?
I think it is appropriate the board
People can do as they like on their own systems and resources, but when
participating in the GNOME community, they should do so with respect.
Refusing to exclude anyone is itself an exclusionary policy; it selects
for the kind of people who will put up with absolutely anything, and
excludes
Hi Karen,
Thanks for your questions. Responses inline:
Have you ever done any fundraising?
Yes, although not on such a scale as I would expect a GNOME director will
have to take on. More like a few small fundraisers for various charities
and perhaps more recently, some of you may remember that
Hi Erick
First, thanks to all of you for running as directors.
Thanks for your question!
Currently, GNOME is a strong platform for development, but it's lacking
integration and features to be a complete, fully integrated desktop
environment like Mac OS X, for instance. My question is:
What
Hi Sri,
Thanks for your questions!
It is my impression (and I state impression because I am providing no
data) that GNOME has more reliance on people paid to work on GNOME
than community. I do not question the passion and dedication to those
who are paid on GNOME, I know that they would do
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 3:17 AM, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 09:04:52PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
* https://kickstarter.com/projects/technoruninc/stratos/
What is the relationship between this and GNOME?
None whatsoever, other than
The license we've chosen clearly allows people to sell products with the
code included, so I'm assuming this is strictly a trademark issues.
Jeff initially raised some concern about whether source code was being
included as they don't seem to indicate either way.
As far as I can tell this
85 matches
Mail list logo
