Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[shulie]

On 5/3/21 12:40 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Wow, such hypocrisy. 



The hypocrisy is the misusess of GNU trademarks to mislead people.

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Andreas R.]

Hi Jacob,

> There seem to be two
> different people both named Andreas here, 

This is correct. Unfortunately, even though Jean-Louis is a very spirited
defender of GNU, I feel his zeal sometimes gets in the way of reading
comprehension. It happened before, and correcting him on the matter
proved fruitless.

> one of whom is mildly critical of
> this "GNU Assembly" group 

I am very critical of the Assembly, and on points of fault I actually agree
with Jean-Louis (and Alfred), but in my assessment I tried to draw a line
between which transgressions are technical, and which transgressions would
be actionable.

"Actionable" here means involving lawyers and courts and all sorts of
last-resort nastiness to enforce compliance.

In my opinion there are three reasons for the GNU project to try and
avoid getting entangled:

- It costs time and money, and this needs to be weighed against the
potential gains. Forcing GNU maintainers to drop out of the project
is not something resources should be spent on lightly, in my 
opinion.

- As misguided as I feel they are, they are people and volunteers. They
should be able to disagree and voice that disagreement, even if that
disagreement proves provocative to some level. A strict line between
words and actions should be maintained when assessing the actual
damage they are doing to the GNU project and not just a gut feeling
that they are "wrong" overall.

- At the end of 2019 discussion about governance fell apart because it
became clear the then gnu.tools people had no roadmap for governance
other than getting rid of rms. Now, some 20 months later, they still
do not. The Assembly's actions and public visibility seems to hinge on 
controversies surrounding rms. Since these controversies are mostly
sorted by now, taking legal action would provide them with another
controversy to raise their profile again, as it would play to their
"rms - tyrant" narrative.

On that last point, I'd like to stand by my recommendations: that
further action only be undertaken if they start to undermine the
integrity of the GNU project by (for now) adding new projects or by 
changing the definition of software freedom. In these cases it would be
clear to every observer that a tiny minority is trying to force 
their will on the GNU project, so they couldn't use any publicity
to positively raise their profile. The rest of their provocations
should simply be countered by discussion and publications, where
and when possible.

> > [...]
> >  the Glibc abortion joke
> 
> Is that the "Future Change Warning" in the node for the abort() function in
> the manual?  I had always taken that as ridiculing government censorship.

As far as I can tell it's existence was a fairly petty peeve of O'Donnel, but 
was 
defensible since it could be interpreted as political outside of free 
software politics.

In my opinion that defense was negated by his employer butting in, unasked,
on the FSF board governance, stating they should replace their board for no 
free software related reason.

cheers,
Andreas

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Ali Reza Hayati]

Should I mention that truth doesn't care about people's feelings? Some 
of you know me, some don't. Those who know me also know that I always 
try to be respectful. However, this doesn't mean I'm always kind.


I respect people, not their opinions. If something is idiotic or dumb, 
that's the case, I can't help it.


Stop whining about people not being nice, instead, focus on the 
arguments. If you don't have a good argument or your whole argument is 
that someone is not nice to you, you're in a wrong earth.


I support you though, I believe we should all fight for a nicer world in 
which people are kind to one another, but as long as it's the matter of 
truth or false, your feelings have no value, this includes me too.


Please people, stop fighting about feelings or people being nice, and 
focus on the arguments. Progress will be made by doing work, not by 
being nice. Now you can be nice while you do work or you're mean and 
still doing work. If you're one of those, then you're fine, if you're 
only focused on being nice, then get out please.


I say all that with respect and a happy face.

--
Ali Reza Hayati (https://alirezahayati.com)
Libre culture activist and privacy advocate
PGP: 88A5 BDB7 E07C 39D0 8132 6412 DCB8 F138 B865 1771



OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jacob Bachmeyer]

Jean Louis wrote:

[...]

Was it me who started split of the GNU project and presented it on
this GNU mailing list? Or was it you?
  


On a minor note, there seems to be some confusion here:  the discussion 
was started by "Andreas R. ", while you are 
replying to "Andreas Enge " on this branch.  There seem 
to be two different people both named Andreas here, one of whom is 
mildly critical of this "GNU Assembly" group and one who jumped in with 
questionable accusations against you, implicitly calling for you to be 
silenced.



[...]
 the Glibc abortion joke
  


Is that the "Future Change Warning" in the node for the abort() function 
in the manual?  I had always taken that as ridiculing government censorship.



-- Jacob

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

Jean Louis, please restrain yourself and stop posing messages with a
reply to each every message on this list.  There is little point to
continue threads that are enteirly unrelated to the GNU project (or
Libreplanet).

More specifically, discussion about groups that are entierly unrelated
to the GNU project are better dome elsewhere -- not here.  

This isn't jean-louis-discuss.

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Adrienne G. Thompson]

> > [...] when a woman wrote us to express
> > personally and specifically her concerns around RMS we ran her off, and
> > ran her down.
>
> If you are talking about the woman who wrote to this list back in Oct
> 2019, I was one  of the people who responded to her, and I was polite
> and respectful...
>


> Since Sep 2019 to this day, RMS has received hundreds --hundreds-- of
> private messages of support, including from women.


+1 Dora!!

Such is the level of fright that this self-righteousness cult has created.
> It's
> unsustainable and it has to stop. It _will_ stop


I disagree, however, that "It _will_ stop". The corporate-backed campaign
against RMS chooses to exploit women to throw their grenades. These women
are proxies, front[women] serving greedy corporate interests seeking to
control Free/Libre/Open-source software.

We should not give them (the proxies) legitimacy by entertaining them.

Legal action will be necessary to bring an end to the attacks.


Adrienne
--
Freedom - no pane, all gaiGN!

References:

   1. GNU C-Graph: http://www.gnu.org/software/c-graph
   2. Code Art Now: http://codeartnow.com
   3. Abertheid Campaign: http://www.abertheid.info
   4. Follow me on Twitter: @AdrienneGT 
   @GNUcgraph 
   5. Let's Link Up: https://www.linkedin.com/in/adriennegt/
   6. Knees On My Neck:
   https://twitter.com/AdrienneGT/status/1288648018783277068
   7. Rise Up for Richard Stallman: https://www.stallmansupport.org

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[shulie]

On 4/28/21 1:35 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> What exactly? Naming a person 4 times while commenting their actions? 



No , for falsely accusing someone of sexually assualt and approving rape
when you know it is just not true.


Furthermore, how can anyone trust them with GNU licensing standards when
they can't stop stepping on the GNU tradmark?

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* Corwin Brust  [2021-04-30 21:29]:
> Thanks Andrea.
> 
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 12:08 PM Andreas Enge  wrote:
> 
> > I call out to the moderators of these mailing lists, if moderation indeed
> > still exists there, to act against such hate mail by Jean Louis singling
> > out an individual whose actions they disagree with:
> >
> > Am Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 10:12:13AM +0300 schrieb Jean Louis:
> > > Ludovic Courtès (Guix)
> > > Ludovic Courtès
> > > Ludovic Courtès
> > > Ludovic Courtès
> >
> > This cannot be qualified but as personal harrassment.
> >
> 
> Cosigned.

Nonsense. No personal harassment involved. I am not hater. That is
fabrication.

As I have not written to Ludovic, it cannot be personal harassment. If
my comments are felt by Ludovic as intense feelings of suffering, I
prefer Ludovic telling me that.

You misquoted me Andresa, I don't appreciate that, as I did not write
four times, one after the other Ludovic's name.

Was it me who started split of the GNU project and presented it on
this GNU mailing list? Or was it you?

In that email, which you misquoted there was me:

- asking you if you represent the AntiGNU assembly? No answer.

- analyzing your groups being divisive, dividing the community

- having personal issues, mixing it with the group's purposes

- infringement of copyrights on your domain gnu.tools, which you did
  not address until today, that I know

- I said Ludovic is not GNU project leader, he could kind of pretend,
  but is not

- I said that I consider him criminal for his public harassment and
  illegal attempt to take-over non-profit such as FSF, and I said I
  consider him criminal. Why? Because criminals want to take what is
  not theirs. Because criminals will accuse others of what they are
  doing themselves. That is my opinion. Since 2019, Ludovic is keeping
  that harassing statement on Guix website, and I asked him to provide
  evidences in 2019, all what he could say was the Glibc abortion
  joke. LOL.

  It is my right to say what I wish and want.

  In 2019, I have asked rekado on IRC to open up the page for public
  comments, he refused. Then I have gathered public comments from
  other websites and published it.

  Your group is not transparent. Don't expect that people don't talk
  about it. I said minimum, other people said so much, and your group
  still behaves so much rightous and free of impunity.

That is not personal harassment, as I did not write to Ludo. I don't
consider it harassment at all, neither I have personally anything
against you Andreas nor Ludo, I appreciate your work, just that I see
your group is confused with directions.

For as long as Guix is keeping the unfounded public shaming page
there, I will keep my pages.

As soon as Guix retracts their pages, I will retract my pages. I think
that is a fair deal.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* Corwin Brust  [2021-04-30 21:29]:
> Please reread the threads with an eye to how much good the topics most
> favored on this list have done and will do to draw people and
> public opinion to our cause.  I hope and expect we can move forward with a
> better tone and clearly visible mutual respect.  What I have seen is that
> our "work environment" has been and is becoming increasingly toxic.

I don't agree that discussions with disagreements should be called
toxic, that generalizes things.

IMHO, people did not speak enough, some are taking sides, some are
neutral, there are conflicts, and it is very good that people exchange
opinions and communicate. That is the best, as the communication alone
is minimizing the tensions.

By communicating more, we will also achieve clearly visible mutual
respect.

Also note that when speaking of respect one has to look into related
factors. As when a person gets hit in the face and defends, it is not
appropriate to just come along and say: hey guys, calm down, you are
behaving badly. As maybe both of them will feel injustice and lack of
understanding on observer's side. And maybe one of them was simply hit
without good reason.

What could move towards solving the conflict is to say "what
happened"? And then discussion about that could solve it.

Or maybe, who told you something bad about RMS?

As often are people in the conflict because of rumours.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* Corwin Brust  [2021-04-30 21:29]:
> FWIW, I find the flood of replies demanding "evidence" and otherwise
> interrogating the concerns you express here to be excellent substantiation
> in and of themselves.

Corwin, would you be accused of illegal acts or as a complice to
illegal acts, and somebody publishes it online, and persists accusing
you, and not providing evidences persists accusing you, would you then
say the same?


-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Arun Isaac]

> In general, I don't find it easy to find source code for package
> "hello".

Don't know what you're talking about. It's very easy to get source code
for a package. For example,

$ guix build -S hello


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Corwin Brust]

Thanks Andrea.

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 12:08 PM Andreas Enge  wrote:

> I call out to the moderators of these mailing lists, if moderation indeed
> still exists there, to act against such hate mail by Jean Louis singling
> out an individual whose actions they disagree with:
>
> Am Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 10:12:13AM +0300 schrieb Jean Louis:
> > Ludovic Courtès (Guix)
> > Ludovic Courtès
> > Ludovic Courtès
> > Ludovic Courtès
>
> This cannot be qualified but as personal harrassment.
>

Cosigned.

FWIW, I find the flood of replies demanding "evidence" and otherwise
interrogating the concerns you express here to be excellent substantiation
in and of themselves.

Peers devoted to free software,

Please reread the threads with an eye to how much good the topics most
favored on this list have done and will do to draw people and
public opinion to our cause.  I hope and expect we can move forward with a
better tone and clearly visible mutual respect.  What I have seen is that
our "work environment" has been and is becoming increasingly toxic.

For example
 - Well respected philosophies are given kilobytes of air-time while any
decent or nuance that could serve to evolve the tactics we apply in
bringing these important points more successfully to the greater community
are ignored or (more likely) heckled, pelted with platitudes and sophistry.
 - Any questioning of the greatness or suggestion of the fallibility of our
esteemed founder is ridiculed.   Is Dr. Stallman so weak we must rush to
deflect any unflattering commentary or views?

I beg the assembly: don't rush to the aid of our principles nor our heros.
They can each take critique. They will grow only stronger for our honesty
even as we become more able to attract and sustain more diverse
viewpoints.  Moreover, your fellow community members are (or should be
assumed to be) as capable as ourselves:  we are each responsible for
separating signal and noise.

Let me be very clear and direct:  when a woman wrote us to express
personally and specifically her concerns around RMS we ran her off, and ran
her down.  There's no place for that in this community, nor in any
community dedicated to the public good.   It has nothing to do with the
veracity much less universality of the concerns she took the time to share
with us.   We should be grateful to anyone troubling to hold up the
mirror.  If we find it distorted, and wonder why that soul searching should
begin at home. When we finally show those questions, we must do so in a way
that encourages and rewards the courage shown.  Little I've read on this
list since the convention has conveyed we are able to do this, much less
that we are committed to doing so.

Thanks for your consideration.

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[quiliro]

Jean Louis  writes:

> By the way, could you please update the license on this page:
> https://gnu.tools/en/documents/free-software/
>
> The page is mentioning "open source" that was never in the original
> article for free software here:
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html and original article is
> licensed under Copyright © 1996, 2002, 2004-2007, 2009-2019, 2021 Free
> Software Foundation, Inc. This page is licensed under a Creative
> Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. -- which
> means, that you are required legally:
>
> - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and
>   indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable
>   manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you
>   or your use.
>
>   There is no URL to the original article, in fact there is no URL or
>   hyperlink to any GNU.org page, no proper attribution, no license,
>   and no indication of modification. You are required to respect
>   copyrights. 

This makes me doubt if Guix really respects FSF FSDG.  If they cannot
respect free software licenses, maybe they include non-free software.
That is why I proposed in 2019 that approved distros do not audit
themselves for freedom.  A third party should.  But Donald Robertson has
delayed with different excuses over time.  John Sullivan also decided to
overlook this.  They just bounced it back on me, instead of taking
action as FSF should do.  I wonder why they have so much decision power
in FSF and not the board.

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) <936-846-2...@kylheku.com> [2021-04-29 10:30]:
> A code of conduct document is little more than a condensed set
> of corporate or governmental HR policies, disguised as some
> sort of "organically grown" community document.

Code of conduct is used in an organization with employees is
fundamentally different to organizations with arbitrary volunteers.

Corporate policy is to exchange with employees, here is the salary,
and in exchange we need the work, and work has to be conducted by
specific manner, for example, don't spit on the floor.

Those corporate Code of conducts are not politics focused, neither
majority of such promote issues like feminism, gender problems,
etc. They are mostly focused on business and how organization conducts
its business matters.

There exist very clear agreement, legal agreement named employment
agreement between the employer and employee.

In our voluntary organizations contributors they do not have any
formal legal agreement with any employee, often there is no employee
and no legal entity. There is no salary for contributors in free
software projects. There is no direct dependency. Sometimes there are
donations.

Those who promote code of conduct speak of wanting diversity. But in
the same time they also speak of not tolerating diversity. It is
contradiction in itself.

If I want diversity, I want diversity. I will then tolerate well
behaved people and bad mannered people. That is diversity for me. I
can immediately think of carnevals, Mardi Grass
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mardi_Gras, open air concerts, and
similar public gatherings. There is special feeling coming with it.

On such public gatherings there are all kinds of people, some will be
drunk, some will be funny, there will be abusive and sexist
people. Nobody likes worst happening, but that is true diversity.

Tolerance is key word.

Not assuming bad faith just because somebody is upset or made some sex
related joke.

Code of conduct is strictly a document authorizing thought police to
exclude people out of "their diversity", example from Guix code of
conduct:
https://github.com/pjotrp/guix/blob/master/CODE-OF-CONDUCT

"We are committed to making participation in this project a
harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of level of
experience, gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation,
disability, personal appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, age,
religion, or nationality."

The above statement is obviously not true, as it is impossible for a
project maintainer to know what is "harassment free" experience for
everyone.

By the way one of them D.T. tried harassing me online from his farm,
behind computer, and beyond the GNU project but declined meeting me in
person to solve the issue. It is very easy to appear brave behind the
keyboard. Why would I need any "Code of Conduct" to help me with the
harasser? I don't. I can solve issue myself, there is legal system,
there is police, there is recourse for that.

I need no gang of bullies to protect me from bullies. If bully comes
along, I know how to deal with one. 

It is very fine to tell people to stop with harassment.

What is not fine is the open interpretation on what harassment is, and
that a small group is allowed to do basically anything they wish and
want by justifying their actions by Code of conduct. Of course, in
anonymous way. Somebody complained, you said something wrong, we kick
you out.

No expectedhearing, no expected confrontation with accuser, thus open
to misinterpretations on what happened.

More quotes from Guix code of conduct:

"Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:"

The above statement only lists "examples" which means that
interpretation on what is wrong and right is left to project
maintainers.

We already had Terms of Service for every website, in general private
websites can simply kick out any person for whatever reason. I find
that better, not necessarily just, but better to say "this is ours and
we will do what we want" rather than giving appearance of some just
and public cause.

To say these are "examples" makes it open for vague misinterpretations
and thus injustices.

> * The use of sexualized language or imagery

Humans are sexual. We love sex. At least majority of us loves sex.

I cannot possibly imagine why any kind of mentioning of sex or
sexualized language would be "breach" of behavior. There are vulgar
expressions, every decent conference should warn people who express
themselves vulgary. But to prohibit any use of sexualized language or
imagery would IMHO also obstruct freedom zero.

It becomes practically impossible to create programs that recognize
coppulation on pictures and in websites, as the sole mentioning of
those programs would be in violation of the so called code of
conduct.

It becomes practically impossible in such projects with vague codes of
conducts to make software vibrators, and other sex toys, sexual chat,
and dating sites 

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* quil...@riseup.net  [2021-04-29 20:47]:
> This makes me doubt if Guix really respects FSF FSDG.  If they cannot
> respect free software licenses, maybe they include non-free
> software.

I am sure that Guix would remove non-free software from system when
such is discovered. Guix will become major system to bootstrap other
distributions. There are many good points.

But licensing issues for software packages are not solved IMHO.

I think nobody reads those licenses.

Example is easy:

$ guix install hello

in /gnu/store the license is there "COPYING" and is fine.

"If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the
Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or
a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided
you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to
find the Corresponding Source.  Regardless of what server hosts the
Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is
available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements."

In this example, when I get hello package there is no clear direction
next to the object code saying where and how to find corresponding
source.

On the Guix manual, I cannot find a reference:
https://guix.gnu.org/manual/en/html_node/Concept-Index.html

There are 2 mentions of "source" but do not help in getting the source
code for particular package.

I know that sources' locations are embedded in package description,
but that cannot be said to be "clear direction" next to object
code. Package description is source code definitely not readable by
everyone. There is URL like mirror:// and there is scheme which one
need to understand to find the URL to the source.

In general, I don't find it easy to find source code for package
"hello". There may be a way, but it is not aligned with the license.

License is violated how I see it.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* quil...@riseup.net  [2021-04-29 19:27]:
> Jean Louis  writes:
> 
> > By the way, could you please update the license on this page:
> > https://gnu.tools/en/documents/free-software/
> >
> > The page is mentioning "open source" that was never in the original
> > article for free software here:
> > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html and original article is
> > licensed under Copyright © 1996, 2002, 2004-2007, 2009-2019, 2021 Free
> > Software Foundation, Inc. This page is licensed under a Creative
> > Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. -- which
> > means, that you are required legally:
> >
> > - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and
> >   indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable
> >   manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you
> >   or your use.
> >
> >   There is no URL to the original article, in fact there is no URL or
> >   hyperlink to any GNU.org page, no proper attribution, no license,
> >   and no indication of modification. You are required to respect
> >   copyrights. 
> 
> This makes me doubt if Guix really respects FSF FSDG.  If they cannot
> respect free software licenses, maybe they include non-free software.
> That is why I proposed in 2019 that approved distros do not audit
> themselves for freedom.  A third party should.  But Donald Robertson has
> delayed with different excuses over time.  John Sullivan also decided to
> overlook this.  They just bounced it back on me, instead of taking
> action as FSF should do.  I wonder why they have so much decision power
> in FSF and not the board.

I have tried making that point back in 2016. I am not sure if Guix's
automated system respect licenses, I think it does not. Here is
message from 2016 to Ludovic, it was private, I never got an answer on
that. I wonder why.

[Wed Apr  6 2016]
 Hello Ludovic. I wish to tell you in private.  [09:32]
 I would rather tell you in private for GPL2 conformance   [09:53]
 as when distributing binaries, it is not enough to provide link to
original sources  [09:54]
 also when patching original sources, that is modification  [09:55]
 I guess that functions shall be made to provide: storage (on
servers) for modified sources, to be downloaded later. Or 3-years
written offers.
 anyway there must be storage
 for each version that was ever downloaded as substitute, there
shall be storage.  [09:56]
 and there shall be link in the package definitions if you ask me,
to such source storage, or there must be written 3 years offer...
[09:57]
 so I guess that there are new functions to be made... 

IMHO, those issues are not solved today.

I may be wrong. However, I think I raised that issue on Guix IRC too,
but it was just ignored. 

Issue is however open and ignored for 5 years 23 days.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* Federico Leva (Nemo)  [2021-04-28 20:35]:
> Il 28/04/21 18:27, Andreas Enge ha scritto:
> > This cannot be qualified but as personal harrassment.
> 
> What exactly? Naming a person 4 times while commenting their
> actions?

But I am sorry, I don't remember ever writing like 4 times Ludo's
name, I really don't.

Either that was not quoted well, maybe it was changed, or is something
else.

Why should I write 4 times Ludo's name in any email? I don't get
it. Somebody help me.


-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Il 28/04/21 18:27, Andreas Enge ha scritto:

This cannot be qualified but as personal harrassment.


What exactly? Naming a person 4 times while commenting their actions? Do 
you propose to apply such a standard universally, e.g. to an email 
criticising actions by an FSF or GNU office holder? (I might have missed 
something in Jean Louis' message, I admit I've only read it quickly.)


As a reminder, we have the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html

Jean Louis, please consider whether certain expressions, for instance 
"like children", may sound like personal attacks. Andreas, please 
consider whether expressions like "hate email", which seem to attribute 
intent, may be needlessly harsh and inflammatory and therefore fall 
short of the standards proposed by the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines.


Best regards,
Federico

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) <936-846-2...@kylheku.com> [2021-04-29 10:30]:
> A code of conduct document is little more than a condensed set
> of corporate or governmental HR policies, disguised as some
> sort of "organically grown" community document.

Every organization may have its own codes, variety of codes are out
there, and there is nothing wrong in attempt to harmonize behavior of
its members.

Here we have the context that is different from commonly used
organizational codes, the new context encompasses new politics such as
feminism, gender problems, and may be construed often as a general
method for thought police. Say something wrong and you are done.

Problem at hand here is that we have various people, some people are
more sensitive than others, but don't want and cannot express
themselves. Some others will come along and inevitably have different
opinions. Those sensitive want to survive well and without being
offended, Code of Conduct mostly serves those who are unable to tell
others how they feel, why they feel so, and unable to provide concrete
objective reasons for it.

As Codes of Conducts are very generalized, not well defined such as
attorney made agreements, they are often abused by their own authors
or by the managers who wrote those Codes of Conducts, they allow wide
range of interpretations and thus misrepresentations.

Example is the Guix' code of conduct as adopted from Contributor Code
of Conduct: https://github.com/pjotrp/guix/blob/master/CODE-OF-CONDUCT

Where it says that they are committed to avoid (among other things):

- Personal attacks
- Trolling or insulting/derogatory comments
- Public or private harassment

Despite that Guix has its own code of conduct and GNU project does not
have code of conduct, in other words they are not same entity, Guix
finds it appropriate to gather group of people, incite them to provoke
personal attacks, annoy others, and make derogatory comments on RMS:
https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/

and to tell "we must also acknowledge that Stallman’s behavior over
the years has undermined a core value of the GNU project: the
empowerment of all computer users. GNU is not fulfilling its mission
when the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we
want to reach out to."

That is "derogatory" statement as by definition 1. derogative,
derogatory, disparaging -- (expressive of low opinion; "derogatory
comments"; "disparaging remarks about the new house").

Despite that it is quite clear how people are in support for RMS, the
small group of Code of Conduct people continues with their derogatory
statements.

What is even more interesting is that they use the subdomain
guix.gnu.org which is on GNU.org domain and are able to make such
derogatory statements, and personal attacks.

None of them signers of those defamatory statement did not tell of any
personal issue with RMS, neither how they wanted to handle it in a
good faith.

It is personal attack and public harassment.

It is in contradiction to Guix's Code of Conduct.

The Guix's code of conduct and so many others may have this clause:
"Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behavior
may be reported by contacting a project maintainer at
guix-maintain...@gnu.org.  All complaints will be reviewed and
investigated and will result in a response that is deemed necessary
and appropriate to the circumstances. Maintainers are obligated to
maintain confidentiality with regard to the reporter of an incident."

That clause basically say that accuser will be held anonymous and
maintainers or whoever will be judges to punish the accused. This is
in contradiction to the legal system and established norms of our
civilization, including any mediation process, that accuser and
accused must be brought together in a hearing to make issues evident,
without words, without evidences and hearing, nobody shall be
considered criminal neither should be accused.

Now GNU came first, then came Guix under GNU umbrella. GNU does not
have Code of Conduct, Guix has. Would GNU have Code of Conduct, that
Guix statement would be removed right away.

It is not removed, as the purpose of GNU is not politics, but
distribution of free software. When looking at purposes, the purpose
is stronger and has to be supported foremost. GNU project does not,
obviously it does not practice the methods of thought police.

Here is a story of injustice where Code of Conduct has been applied
and how cruel it comes over:

From:
https://www.fast.ai/2020/10/28/code-of-conduct/

> Summary: NumFOCUS found I violated their Code of Conduct (CoC) at
> JupyterCon because my talk was not “kind”, because I said Joel Grus
> was “wrong” regarding his opinion that Jupyter Notebook is not a good
> software development environment. Joel (who I greatly respect, and
> consider an asset to the data science community) was not involved in
> NumFOCUS’s action, was not told about it, and did not support
> it. 

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* Andreas Enge  [2021-04-28 18:28]:
> I call out to the moderators of these mailing lists, if moderation indeed
> still exists there, to act against such hate mail by Jean Louis singling
> out an individual whose actions they disagree with:

I have no hate against Ludo, I admire his work and welcome him.

It is only that I state my opinion. Defamation is false accusation of
na offense, or malicious misrepresentatioin of someone's words or
actions. I am fully free to say that Ludovic is leader in Guix and
that he used Guix project for defamatory statements on GNU project and
RMS. That statement of mine is however, so far from any hate.

I don't find it proper as he practices whatever defamatory politics on
GNU pages. Please remove it from GNU pages, stop misrepresenting GNU,
and I will not say here nothing, as your personal opinions are
personal. Then we can take it elsewhere.

Please don't whine if I mention Ludovic, it was not me who started
defamation in the first place. He and you, and all the group, you have
to bear with the consequences. People will talk. Bear with
consequences. My opinion is mild. I really don't hate anybody of these
people, why would I? I find them all intelligent, but I call them
defamatory for the reason, as that is what they do for as long as they
are publishing that statement.

You incited division in GNU project and keep dividing GNU
project. Yes, I find it malicious. You called people into the AntiGNU
assemble, not because they "suddenly discovered the domain" -- but
because you organized them, you are dividing GNU project for your
political reasons. And I can bet you never confronted RMS to speak
about whatever issue you have, so far now you have no objective issue,
just vague issues. Much of it has been already clarified here:
https://stallmansupport.org/

None of you have so far apologized or retracted your defamatory
statements.

You come to GNU mailing list with intention to divide more people,
where it is clear that you want to cause illegal take over of
non-profit corporation. Then you tell me I am the hater? I am very
surprised on that.

Can you respect the legal documents of non-profit named FSF? Can you
understand that it is legally founded non-profit that publishes its
statements annually, and that the only real impact caused was by your
group and similar defamators when they caused RMS to resign? How many
speeches did RMS hold after resignation? Much less than before.

You have to view straight into consequences of your doings. To tell"
the word "defamation" is warning for you. You can also get sued, but
you enjoy the privilege of kindness where somebody values your
projects and your contributions more than the personal image and
fame. You as group basically abuse elder respectful person with
impunity that is to me not understandable.

And so far none of you have any direct issue to solve with RMS, and if
you would have, why don't you solve it?

It is cancel culture.

This is the intersection of people who signed defamatory
statement on GNU Project October 7, 2019, and who are now
also speaking on the mailing list in the AntiGNU Assembly:

The defamatory statement on GNU project The AntiGNU Assembly has about same
and RMS, as published on Guix project   initiators, where it is obvious that
website, hosted under GNU.org,  they disgruntled feelings come from
October 7, 2019, has following  failure to understand that RMS is on
people (and more than that):board:

Ludovic Courtès (GNU Guix, GNU Guile)   Ludovic Courtès (GNU Guile, GNU 
Guile-RPC, GNU Guix, GNU Shepherd)
Ricardo Wurmus (GNU Guix, GNU GWL)  Ricardo Wurmus (Guile-Debbugs, GNU 
Guix, Guix Workflow Language)
Matt Lee (GNU Social)
Andreas Enge (GNU MPC)  Andreas Enge (GNU MPC, GNU Guix)
Samuel Thibault (GNU Hurd, GNU libc)Samuel Thibault (GNU Hurd)
Carlos O'Donell (GNU libc)  Carlos O'Donell (GNU C Library, GNU 
Compiler Collection (GCC))
Andy Wingo (GNU Guile)  Andy Wingo (Guile-OpenGL, Guile-GNOME, 
GNU Guile)
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso (GNU Octave)
Mark Wielaard (GNU Classpath)   Mark J. Wielaard (GNU C Library, GNU 
Compiler Collection (GCC), GNU Classpath)
Ian Lance Taylor (GCC, GNU Binutils)
Werner Koch (GnuPG) Werner Koch (GNU Libgcrypt, GnuPG)
Daiki Ueno (GNU gettext
Christopher Lemmer Webber   Christopher Lemmer Webber (8sync, GNU 
MediaGoblin)
Jan Nieuwenhuizen (GNU Mes  Jan Nieuwenhuizen (GNU LilyPond, GNU 
Mes)
John Wiegley (GNU Emacs)
Tom Tromey (GCC, GDB)
Jeff Law (GCC, Binutils —   Jeff Law (GNU Compiler Collection (GCC))
Han-Wen Nienhuys (GNU LilyPond) Han-Wen Nienhuys (GNU LilyPond)

> Am Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 10:12:13AM +0300 schrieb Jean Louis:
> > Ludovic Courtès (Guix)
> > Ludovic Courtès
> > Ludovic Courtès
> > Ludovic Courtès

I never wrote this, that is not my email, I did not write that above.

> This cannot be qualified but as personal 

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Jean Louis]

* Federico Leva (Nemo)  [2021-04-28 20:35]:
> Jean Louis, please consider whether certain expressions, for instance "like
> children", may sound like personal attacks.

I did not want to tell anything bad about children as they usually
behave somehow to the level of their age. In fact I wanted to use the
word "immature" as in the meaning 1. (2) immature -- (characteristic
of a lack of maturity; "immature behavior"), so I hereby apologize,
and this word may apply to me as well, especially in this paragraph.

Actions done by adults I consider to demand objectiveness. When
confronted to address the issue and person does not address the issue,
then I have no other choice but to say that behavior is immature.

I did ask Ludovic to explain, he did not explain, he has no issue to
tell. So the defamatory statements are there with intentional neglect
of truth.

My comments and talk to Ludo can be seen here:
http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2019-10-07.log as under nick jmarciano
and I asked Ludo, if he can tell me facts over the defamatory
statement how "Stallman's behavior over the years has undermined a
core value of the GNU project" (is what Ludo's group is defaming) and
Ludo said, no, Guix chat is not place for the debate. But Guix website
is place for debate, but Guix chate is not place for debate. Of course
I am surprised as in Guix management there is definitely no
transparency neither call for any kind of dialog, like what is taking
place on this mailing list. That does not work there.

I asked them to turn on comments on that page, so that if it is
"collective statement" how the defamatory AntiGNU group wish to say,
that it really becomes collectively commented.

I have asked many times, Ludo refused to tell me. So I asked again, he
refused to tell me.

Then he said he does not like abort joke. But abort joke, did it
really undermine any core value of GNU project?

Sorry, I cannot see that.

> Andreas, please consider whether expressions like "hate email",
> which seem to attribute intent, may be needlessly harsh and
> inflammatory and therefore fall short of the standards proposed by
> the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines.

I really don't hate this people, I am arguing why they are
misrepresenting themselves, that is all.

You want your own space, make it, but don't misrepresent
yourself. Don't you see how much harm you do? Of course that group
cannot see that.

And none of them is making free software speech, they make software,
great, but none of them promotes free software philosophy neither
links to GNU.org pages. 

The AntiGNU assembly opened up because they wanted to do the division
of GNU project, would RMS stay in FSF -- but RMS resigned.

There was almost no activity on gnu.tools website in 2020.

Those "guys" are not even guys, nobody attended the mailing list. It
is just this:
https://lists.gnu.tools/hyperkitty/list/assem...@lists.gnu.tools/2020/10/

Until Ludovic Courtès started it:
https://lists.gnu.tools/hyperkitty/list/assem...@lists.gnu.tools/thread/SMFKD7M34VUTUW45MSO4UOWL4C7V5FQT/

"Like many I’m astonished by the FSF’s decision to reinstate RMS (who
actually still had voting rights, I recently learned)."

Comment: is not like many, it is  group of people who have different
politics, who then bad mouth RMS and invite quite innocent people into
your divisiveness.  As majority is supporting RMS:
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ I don't know what you are still
mocking there if you respect some kind of polls or democratic public
opinion. But you don't.

"I support the call in the open letter to RMS¹ “for the removal of the
entire Board of the Free Software Foundation.”  Until it has cleaned
house, this foundation can no longer pretend to represent the free
software movement." --

what a bunch of nonsense!

Ludovic Courtès never gave any, not even one, published free software
philosophy speech. He gave speeches on Guix and technicalities. And
now he is the one who says that!

This is illegal take over attempt of a non-profit corporation that
DOES its job very well. Audited financial statements available:
https://static.fsf.org/nosvn/financial-statements/FinancialStatements-FY2019.pdf

Is there any audited financial statement of Guix? Where is the
accountability?

More from Ludo:

"I also support the call to remove RMS “from all leadership positions,
including the GNU Project” -- sorry, when I read this, I just remember
those jokes with Minion guys, nobody will undertand me, just skip
it. It is ridiculous. I am not calling Ludo to take his shoes out
because I want to slip into his shoes.

Of course I find it disgraceful by definition.

Definition from Wordnet:

1. disgraceful, scandalous, shameful, shocking -- (giving offense to
moral sensibilities and injurious to reputation; "scandalous
behavior"; "the wicked rascally shameful conduct of the bankrupt"-
Thackeray; "the most shocking book of its time")

Yes, I find it shocking that one lacks all the feelings and comes
along to tell project 

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project

[Andreas Enge]

I call out to the moderators of these mailing lists, if moderation indeed
still exists there, to act against such hate mail by Jean Louis singling
out an individual whose actions they disagree with:

Am Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 10:12:13AM +0300 schrieb Jean Louis:
> Ludovic Courtès (Guix)
> Ludovic Courtès
> Ludovic Courtès
> Ludovic Courtès

This cannot be qualified but as personal harrassment.

Ironically, they are making a very good point why we think that GNU needs
a new start with the GNU Assembly; and this initiative is not that of a
single person, but
   https://gnu.tools/en/people/
lists more than 30 people from the GNU project supporting it.

Andreas