I think Matrix doesn't do group video chat itself, it just embeds Jitsi
into a room as a widget
On May 8, 2023 12:42:19 PM PDT, Abe Indoria
wrote:
I'm surprised no one has recommended Matrix.
On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 7:04 AM Don Saklad wrote:
What shall be recommended to
Big Blue Button or Jitsi
[1]https://bigbluebutton.org/
[2]https://meet.jit.si/
Both are ideally self-hosted, but Jitsi works directly at the main site
flawlessly with no issues, no sign-up, it just works, they can test it
easily.
Jitsi is more similar to Zoom.
On
I appreciated the original message and find it relevant.
Software freedom is fundamentally about power, it's not just a manner of
software development. The concern about power is intimately tied to
wealth in society today.
Nobody gets to be billionaire, ultra-wealthy by actually producing a
FWIW, as a link anyone can use, I put together this some years ago,
aiming to be fair and neutral enough while advocating copyleft:
[1]https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/about/licenses
That's probably the ideal link to share in this case IMHO
On May 17, 2022 2:27:30 PM PDT, Dennis Payne
It's "mastodon" with two o's not two a's
On 2022-04-26 10:37, Thomas Lord wrote:
If the FSF is not now going very hard on promoting Mastadon,
they should never be trusted to anything right again.
:-)
-t
___
Hey everyone, if you already checked the links yesterday, my talk on the
economics of software freedom was *missing* because there was a major
streaming failure — but I got a live redo chance to give the talk again
for recording and then edit that with part of the original stream that
worked.
oprietary" for most cases.
My inclination at this point is actually to prefer "restricted software".
So, I think it's good to have two terms that can be presented as
opposing. "FLO software" and "restricted software" works well IMO.
Best,
Aaron Wolf
P.S. s
oprietary" for most cases.
My inclination at this point is actually to prefer "restricted software".
So, I think it's good to have two terms that can be presented as
opposing. "FLO software" and "restricted software" works well IMO.
Best,
Aaron Wolf
On 202
022-03-14 14:17, Jean Louis wrote:
* Aaron Wolf [2022-03-15 00:02]:
FWIW, I heard from people at OSI that they *chose* to release the trademark
on "Open Source" in general many years ago because they thought it would be
better to encourage the use of the term. Whether that was a g
FWIW, I heard from people at OSI that they *chose* to release the
trademark on "Open Source" in general many years ago because they
thought it would be better to encourage the use of the term. Whether
that was a good decision is open to debate.
On 2022-03-13 22:50, Jean Louis wrote:
*
ly questionable,
shame on you.
g
On 13. 03. 22 16:07, Aaron Wolf wrote:
I agree with most of that, but I don't accept the idea that
centralized vs decentralized is simply a questions of personal
inclination/assumptions.
I think we can recognize shared concerns about ethics and consider
tha
rather
than primarily block unethical actions, the centralized powers often use
their power unethically.
I'd like to hear others' insights and perspectives on this question.
On 2022-03-13 01:51, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Il 13/03/22 05:52, Aaron Wolf ha scritto:
The inventors of nuclear
whether or not we see a place for limits to software freedom for
dangerous technology. And that discussion doesn't rely on any agreement
about which current actors are good or bad.
On 2022-03-12 10:53, Jean Louis wrote:
* Aaron Wolf [2022-03-12 20:48]:
The recent podcast from Humane Tech folks
The recent podcast from Humane Tech folks grapples with the complexities
of this issue:
https://www.humanetech.com/podcast/49-the-dark-side-of-decentralization
Now, that does not really relate to powerful government entities like
the Russian military, but it does get into questions of danger
There has been a lot of overreacting to a minor post here.
I will readily agree that I was simply wrong when *I* (personally, I
represent no organization here) suggested that the FSF could make a
statement about war. There's a degree to which the org can say some
things, but indeed it is a
Oh ABSOLUTELY, 100% support your suggestion!
There is NO conflict between software freedom and making political
statements!
It is perfectly sensible for anyone, including FSF or individual
projects or developers, to make a strong public statement condemning
acts of war and stating
You might also focus on how Russia uses concepts from political
philosophy, technology like wheels and guns, and can we stop them from
having access to that stuff?
It does seem that restricting various actors from having technology to
do harm is a sensible idea. But who gets to control that
The Mzolla Public License is a fully free software license anyway, even
though last I checked LibreOffice was LGPL, which is also fully free.
It's approved by GNU: see https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
On 2021-12-12 10:41 a.m., Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>
At Snowdrift.coop, we're still working to get launched on our proposals
for how we can fund public goods without relying on exclusivity (i.e.
"club goods" where you join the club by paying for access or watching
ads etc). There's no reason in principle that we need these artificial
exclusions
I support the abolition of copyright and patent law while keeping
trademark law and moving some important things to new laws:
- mandate source release for published works
- prohibit DRM
- expand trademark law to cover all forms of plaigiarism (some aspects
of that rely on copyright today, which
If you already have it, the license was already paid by HP.
If your point is simply to not *accept* the license on loading up the
computer, that's easy. You can get a GNU/Linux install live USB and boot
off of that directly and erase Windows so it will never even run the
first time.
Someone else
On 2021-04-17 8:49 p.m., Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Apr 16, 2021, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>
>> Like here's one story: I was at LibrePlanet 2014 and RMS was speaking
>> and mentioned offhand how a certain sort of older computer with no disk,
>> they used to joke and calle
Thomas, I respect many of the things you have said, and I also think we
should all be hesitant to string this on and on and on. However, I do
not support your proposition that people just leave or that the threads
are nothing but absurdity. For any movement to be strong, it has to be
capable of
clarity in my
post, thanks.
A few in-line comments:
On 2021-04-15 11:56 p.m., Jean Louis wrote:
> * Aaron Wolf [2021-04-16 09:05]:
>> I see boy-cried-wolf dynamics at play in all this. And there *are*
>> witch-hunt dynamics.
>
> Aaron, from conversation with Deb, Danny and
I see boy-cried-wolf dynamics at play in all this. And there *are*
witch-hunt dynamics.
I work to get *past* my own trepidation while trying to engage
constructively. I am honestly nervous. I worry that the sort of people
who are quite upset about RMS being put back on the Board will see *me*
in
On 2021-04-15 5:54 p.m., quil...@riseup.net wrote:
> Aaron Wolf writes:
>
>> Ali,
>>
>> I agree with your concerns here, and I have seen many unfair accusations.
>
> No you don't. You are not even addressing his concerns.
>
I don't need to address his
as greatly
damaging their credibility by failing to distance themselves enough from
the unfair attacks.
Jean, I hope this helps as you requested.
On 2021-04-15 11:43 a.m., Jean Louis wrote:
> * Aaron Wolf [2021-04-15 20:59]:
>> Maybe the most productive outcome is some situation where th
Thomas, I imagine Deb posting here to share her thoughts on the ways she
sees RMS as a problem for the movement, but she's not saying that it
personally drives her away from the movement. She's been involved in
various orgs like Software Freedom Conservancy and is now at the OSI. I
think her point
Ali,
I agree with your concerns here, and I have seen many unfair accusations.
However, we must be sure not to dismiss other concerns. In Deb's recent
reply, she didn't repeat any of the unfair exaggerated accusations. We
can grapple with the more subtle nuanced issues without assuming all
In principle, you could use the GPL straight ahead and even AGPL. That
would require that anyone who distributes the audio and video would
actually include the source files, whatever they might be. This gets
weird. Does it mean all the raw files and audio tracks and the saved
sessions from editing
not sacrifice our effectiveness as a movement.
In harmony,
Aaron Wolf
On 2021-04-04 12:33 a.m., Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
>
>
> On 04/04/2021 03:54, Thomas Lord wrote:
>> Good programmers inevitably learn, somewhere along the way, the
>> following less
Thanks for sharing this perspective. Accepting it at face value, it
reinforces so strongly my view that the open letter against RMS and
other things should have focused *exclusively* on these types of things.
This is a boy-cried-wolf situation. If the debate were strictly on this
type of thing and
On 2021-03-27 2:27 p.m., quiliro wrote:
> Aaron Wolf writes:
>
>
>> Don't just look for the flaws. Ask: how is the Snowden analogy *useful*?
>
> I'll take the bait. How is it? How is attacking an old activist from the
> safety of distance comparable to risking
>
>
> -t
>
>
>
>
> On 2021-03-26 19:29, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> Thomas, you are using the fact that *some* accusations have not held up
>> to scrutiny in order to conclude that all accusations have been
>> scrutinized and not held up.
>>
>&g
Luke, I appreciate your mention of the CRNHQ stuff. I have not seen that
exact material before but many other things like it. I agree
wholeheartedly that this sort of recognition of victim mentality is
important.
Another framing is to say that we can have a TO-ME attitude (victim
consciousness)
Thomas, you are using the fact that *some* accusations have not held up
to scrutiny in order to conclude that all accusations have been
scrutinized and not held up.
I wonder if you would be more gracious if the accusers did more to
emphasize both the unfair aspects of some accusations and
.
On 2021-03-26 2:11 p.m., Jean Louis wrote:
> * Aaron Wolf [2021-03-26 18:56]:
>> I really appreciate seeing the perspective from Georgia. Thanks also
>> deeply to Deb Nicholson for engaging here in this space. Obviously,
>> these negative reports about RMS being presented *h
ike Deb are our whistleblowers, they are insiders who are
>> bringing attention to serious issues. If we ignore or attack
>> whistleblowers, we will fail to learn important lessons. This attitude
>> can be fatal to a movement.
>
> This is a terrible analogy. Ed Snowden was r
eb are our whistleblowers, they are insiders who are
bringing attention to serious issues. If we ignore or attack
whistleblowers, we will fail to learn important lessons. This attitude
can be fatal to a movement.
In solidarity,
Aaron Wolf
(FSF member since 2014, co-founder of Snow
I'm still on a Pixel (original) running LineageOS, so I still get
security updates. I'm quite sure the Pixel 2 is supported by LineageOS
fully.
Side-note: I used to be hesitant to admit to even having a cell phone.
Very ironically, I got my first cell phone ever in 2014 as part of
attending
Liberapay is a relative stand-out in terms of working to overall be
positive. I don't think they are having any sort of remarkable effect
because they just support plain old traditional donations (i.e. it's
just a tool for membership donations not unlike direct membership to FSF
etc). I wouldn't
While that's largely true, people can make whatever sorts of contracts
like NDA's and other things. That doesn't completely disappear if
copyright were abolished.
On 2020-11-02 11:18 a.m., Albert Lee wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 10:57 AM Aaron Wolf <[1]wolft...@riseup.net>
&
On 2020-10-29 9:22 a.m., Jean Louis wrote:
> * Aaron Wolf [2020-10-29 19:00]:
>>
>> On 2020-10-29 8:40 a.m., Jean Louis wrote:
>>
>>> Did you see other logos on GNU website? That is what I meant. And
>>> there is no such thing as control of &
On 2020-10-29 8:40 a.m., Jean Louis wrote:
> Did you see other logos on GNU website? That is what I meant. And
> there is no such thing as control of "free software logos" in the
> context of trademarks, GNU and free software dedicated groups do not
> follow trademark doctrines. Open source
It's like a lock that is in unlocked position?
On 2020-10-28 3:48 p.m., mray wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Short design related intermission:
>
> I'm letting you know that there is now a Free Software Logo ready to use
> for everybody wanting to have a sign that says "Free Software":
>
>
Important topic.
Some links:
https://media.libreplanet.org/mgoblin_media/media_entries/2076/bkuhn-state-of-the-copyleft-union.webm
https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/about/licenses
see footnotes and links there too, such as
https://dustycloud.org/blog/field-guide-to-copyleft/
There's a lot of issues,
fully launched.
Cheers,
Aaron Wolf
co-founder, Snowdrift.coop
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
On 2020-05-23 9:37 a.m., Steve Sullam wrote:
> I wouldn't say libertarian. Libertarians are despicable. They are at
> least partially responsible for why we have that ignorant orange toxic
> mass in White House in the U.S.
>
Steve, the suggestion was "libREtarian" not "libERtarian" but they are
on that. It's much easier
to understand the concerns that way than with the rest of the general
exasperation or accusations.
On 2020-03-14 11:33 a.m., a via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
> On 3/12/20 6:23 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> It would help if you state (or link) the specific concerns abo
On 2020-02-24 23:16, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Aaron Wolf, 24/02/20 17:55:
>> Leaving is better, but if someone*doesn't* leave, they should at least
>> focus on consciousness-raising there. They can do so in replies as well
>> as posts.
>
> Comments may be good
On 2020-02-24 01:03, Raymundo Vásquez Ruiz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Monday, 24 de February de 2020 6:58, Aaron Wolf
> wrote:
>
>> For anyone who won't leave FB, there's some value in specifically
>> bringing anti-FB messages/warnings to the people who are there. I
For anyone who won't leave FB, there's some value in specifically
bringing anti-FB messages/warnings to the people who are there. If the
only FB criticisms are outside FB, then they won't be seen by those who
need them most. So, going to FB to criticize it is at least better than
just using it
I use "FLO" as in Free/Libre/Open. I disagree with the argument that
"open" is a bad term in itself, but I agree that it's insufficient. But
"Open Source" and "Open" are everywhere in the world, and we *are*
talking about that category of stuff (rather than gratis stuff per se).
So, just as a
On 2020-01-14 6:38 p.m., fischersfr...@sent.at wrote:
> Aaron Wolf writes:
>> Are you picturing a case of something like telemetry software that is
>> benign and useful enough given transparency and acceptance by anyone who
>> is getting measured
>
> I am not par
I've never heard of such a license. The only real effort on a
stronger-than-AGPL license that I know of is copyleft-next.
Are you picturing a case of something like telemetry software that is
benign and useful enough given transparency and acceptance by anyone who
is getting measured? And wanting
On 2019-10-12 10:13 a.m., Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> On 2019-10-12 3:20 a.m., Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
>>> Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>>> MBR posted a Facebook link (which should have had a warning/apology
>>>> perhaps)
>>>
On 2019-10-12 3:20 a.m., Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> MBR posted a Facebook link (which should have had a warning/apology perhaps)
>
> I beg my pardon? Warning of / apology for what?
>
Just like "sorry for Facebook link" or something (b
I don't see enough evidence to support even considering this
interpretation of John Sullivan. The post included offensive language as
well. It makes perfect sense for it to have been blocked. Accusations
like this require far more evidence than this sort of scapegoating
speculation.
This sort of
These issues aren't either/or, they are both.
The "virginity" joke is undeniably tied to patriarchy and sexism, and
people who are sensitive to those issues are predictably going to have a
negative reaction. This is indeed part of the long pattern of
uncomfortable issues.
That said, there's
Adrienne, that's a valid concern. People shouldn't be walking on
eggshells. However, that's a misreading of the case here. This is more
like 'Smee realizing on self-reflection that they actually *were* making
assumptions and not being as considerate as they wish to be. I don't
think this apology
On 2019-09-23 4:39 p.m., A. Mani wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 6:11 PM Matt Ivie wrote:
>> This is not the first attack to ever take place on a community or the
>> figurehead of a movement. I think we all know that other important
>> social movements have had their share of media-driven
On 2019-09-23 9:12 a.m., Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 17:01:35 +0100
> Leah Rowe wrote:
>
>>> 2. Attend the LibrePlanet conference in March, where associate
>>> members get costless admission and can attend the associate members'
>>> meeting [2] on Sunday
While I agree *completely* with the concern, the Linux Foundation is a
501(c)(6) with a stated mandate to serve the *business* interests of
companies that use Linux. The FSF as a 501(c)(3) with a social mission
to promote software freedom *is* susceptible to take-over, but it's not
an analogous
the same dysfunctional mob-justice
game that brought us to this place.
On 2019-09-19 1:06 p.m., Adrienne G. Thompson wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 2:30 PM Aaron Wolf <mailto:wolft...@riseup.net>> wrote:
>
> I agree that the call-out
> and cancel culture a
It seems the public haranguing is so good at drawing emotion and
attention that anything that doesn't fit the narrative gets ignored too
often.
And defending the accused in this bold public campaign way *does* fit
the narrative.
But I'm trying to keep pushing a different direction. I agree with
The "thug" style of activists can be so extreme and closed-minded that
they lash out at fellow activists for merely *proposing* diplomacy. Most
don't recognize that their thuggishness is itself the most dangerous
liability, undermining solidarity and credibility. These days, it's
sometimes hard to
worked to maintain respectful discourse here,
trying to really listen to one another.
In harmony,
Aaron Wolf
Snowdrift.coop
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet
Most of the clarifications from Adonay are correct, however the software
freedom movement does not support any patenting of software generally.
That some cases of software patents used defensively might exist in
practice is a complex issue. But in general, there is correct consensus
that software
FWIW, in addition to
https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html which are
outdated somewhat and don't cover much, I've tried to keep updating this
list:
https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/market-research/flo-repos
I've only had substantial time myself with GitHub, GitLab, SourceForge,
On 2019-03-27 3:24 a.m., Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> bill-auger wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 01:05:58 -0500 Cal wrote:
>>> GitHub requires proprietary software (JavaScript).
>>
>> most of the github website is functional with librejs, including opening bug
>> reports and commenting on existing
On 2019-03-15 7:25 p.m., overthefa...@opengroupware.ch wrote:
> On 2019-03-13 08:30, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> On 2019-03-13 7:05 a.m., overthefa...@opengroupware.ch wrote:
>>>
>>> I follow what you're saying about open/open source and not demonizing
>>> it, but woul
On 2019-03-13 11:39 a.m., Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> There's a bunch of confusion going on here. <…>
>>
>> As far as trying to talk about these topics in general, I suggest the use of
>> FLO (Free/Libre/Open), as discussed at
>> https
On 2019-03-13 7:05 a.m., overthefa...@opengroupware.ch wrote:
>
> I follow what you're saying about open/open source and not demonizing
> it, but would you mind clarifying the part about open source not really
> being different? What is it in near unity with?
>
The set of licenses that the OSI
There's a bunch of confusion going on here.
Free/libre includes all freely licensed works, even when GPL incompatible.
GNU itself hosts a list of specifically FREE/LIBRE licenses that are
accepted as such despite the downside of being GPL-incompatible.
On 2/14/19 2:54 PM, Lyberta wrote:
> John Sullivan:
>> Greg Farough writes:
>>
>>> Let's not even joke about suicide or doing violence to people who use the
>>> wrong kind of computer program.
>>>
>>
>> Agreed, and let's let this thread drop. Lyberta is now on moderation,
>> and I'll reach out
On 10/16/2018 07:59 AM, Andrew Engelbrecht wrote:
> On 10/15/2018 07:01 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> I signed up and was posting a few things in the feedback portion about
>> setting up the forum itself. I only posted a couple things before I got
>> this message:
>>
>
I signed up and was posting a few things in the feedback portion about
setting up the forum itself. I only posted a couple things before I got
this message:
"You’ve reached the maximum number of topics a new user can create on
their first day. Please wait 23 hours before trying again."
That
On 08/28/2018 05:37 AM, bill-auger wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 02:43:06 +0200 Thomas Harding
> wrote:
>> Databases are "a set" of informations, and copyright applies on that
>> collection as whole, and moreover on its structure.
>
> if thats true then it is a counter-argument to what the OP
On 08/18/2018 02:41 PM, J.B. Nicholson wrote:
> Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> The argument by individuals that they will benefit by following the
>> crowd is not circular.
>
> They're not following crowds, they're joining a service to distribute
> their work.
Unless the service
https://www.trustroots.org
On 03/21/2018 05:45 PM, debo...@tuta.io wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I am Deborah, and I am a 24-year-old libre software enthusiast, who is
> interested in learning more about libre software and meeting people in the
> free software world! I am a recent associate member
On 12/12/2017 09:25 AM, Leah Rowe wrote:
> Hi everyone :)
>
> The FSF already promotes Minifree's Libreboot T400 on their 2017
> giving guide and as part of RYF.
>
> I've recently re-launched the Libreboot X200, in case anyone is
> interested. It's at a much lower price than before, and
On 09/19/2017 10:52 PM, Nicolás Ortega Froysa wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 02:56:23PM -0700, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> On 09/19/2017 11:50 AM, Nicolás Ortega Froysa wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 06:08:00PM +, Lyberta wrote:
>>>> Given how quickly SaaSS is ta
On 09/19/2017 03:35 PM, Lyberta wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I make orchestral music and was dissatisfied with the lack of quality
> libre sampled orchestral instruments. There are a few gratis orchestras,
> but none of them are good enough:
>
> * Sonatina Symphonic Orchestra - licensed under CC-Sampling+
On 09/19/2017 11:08 AM, Lyberta wrote:
> Given how quickly SaaSS is taking over the world, should we start
> recommending releasing software under AGPL by default? Even if you wrote
> a simple thing intended to be run locally, someone may put it on the
> server, make SaaSS with it and then add
On 08/30/2017 10:10 PM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 21:48:03 -0700, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> What do you mean "only if modifications are made"?
>> Can you cite the part of the license you read that way?
>
> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gp
On 08/30/2017 06:54 PM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 09:19:13 -0700, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>> So if someone downloads such combined work and start a server, do they
>>> have to publish the complete source code? What if they modify it?
>>>
>>
>&
> in fact, both licenses have to contain such an explicit concession to
> each other for the one-way compatibility to work.
>
This bit isn't correct. It's perfectly feasible for a license to say it
is one-directionally compatible (i.e. explicitly allow relicensing or
use in a project of a
On 08/29/2017 02:58 PM, Lyberta wrote:
> Aaron Wolf:
>> You'll need the "or any later version" clause from the GPLv2 stuff. You
>> can ask all the copyright holders if they are willing to add it.
>
> I have talked to other developers and they clarified that the c
On 08/29/2017 02:53 AM, Lyberta wrote:
> Hi. I'm working on the video game called Xonotic[1] that was based on
> the Quake source code[2]. This code was originally released under the
> terms of GNU GPLv2 and I can't find if it has the "or any later version"
> clause. I want to license my code
On 08/20/2017 04:02 PM, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> Interesting view...
>
> I wonder however, how to deal with cases where the site
> visitor/guest/client doesn't have any script blocker or scanner enabled?
> Surely he'll fall into the JavaScript trap... and it's in this situation
> that the
On 08/20/2017 11:10 AM, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> At least for me, using GNU LibreJS 6.0.13, it seems to force
> visitors/guests/clients to use some non-free software, see the attached
> report.
>
>
>
> ___
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>
On 08/19/2017 09:59 PM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 19:52:51 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> blogger.com
>
> Blogger requires non-free JS to even begin to render a page. I've never
> been able to read any blogs hosted on that site, unfortunately.
>
> Unless things have since
On 06/21/2017 05:42 AM, Hellekin O. Wolf wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:31:56PM +0200, John Sullivan wrote:
>> A couple quick things:
>>
>> 1) have you looked at Mailman 3? Has web forum features.
>>
>
> Mailman3 remains a mailing list software with a Web interface.
>
> What you can gain
On 04/17/2017 03:02 PM, Michael Pagan wrote:
> Aaron Wolf <wolft...@riseup.net> wrote:
>> On 04/16/2017 08:32 PM, Michael Pagan wrote:
>>
>>> the work must be under the same license as the original work, too.
>>
>> To be picky and pedantic, what matters f
On 04/16/2017 08:32 PM, Michael Pagan wrote:
> the work must be under the same license as the original work, too.
To be picky and pedantic, what matters for copyleft is merely that the
freedoms may not be stripped away. It doesn't matter whether derivatives
have the exact same license, that's
Thread below proves yet again https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
Please everyone refrain from any facetious or sarcastic or similar text
posts here or otherwise unless explicitly marked.
On 03/08/2017 06:41 AM, A.S. wrote:
> Daniel, please consider writing your emails in a more polite way.
On 02/20/2017 06:46 AM, Pen-Yuan Hsing wrote:
> Dear libreplanet,
>
> I often see online surveys/evaluations done with Google Forms or
> Surveymonkey, but these services are not freedom or privacy respecting.
>
> Are there replacements for them that *are* freedom and privacy
> respecting? Thank
On 06/10/2016 06:39 AM, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> Perhaps you can use LibrePlanet.org to register an action item related
> to the issue.
>
> For example, create a page somewhere on LibrePlanet.org (I recommend
> making a subpage of "Action items", but that's up to you), and make sure
> to
On 06/07/2016 10:37 PM, Julien Kyou wrote:
> On June 8, 2016 1:10:04 AM AST, Aaron Wolf <wolft...@riseup.net> wrote:
>
>
> https://help.distilnetworks.com/hc/en-us/articles/212154438-Third-Party-Browser-Plugins-That-Block-JavaScript
>
> I was going to a we
for the website to
explain to them this terrible experience since I can't even get to the
website.
This trend is super troubling. If a website buys into this company's
security claims and approach, they won't even likely get feedback well
and may not even recognize the problems.
--
Aaron Wolf
co-founder
1 - 100 of 210 matches
Mail list logo
