Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Michael Lustfield]

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 10:09:48 +
Holger Levsen  wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 10:12:47PM -0500, Michael Lustfield wrote:
> > Choice X:
> > 
> > The Debian Project disapproves of recent and past actions taken by FSF. With
> > regards to the latest action (re-acceptance of RMS to the board), it now
> > chooses to cut ties with the foundation. The Debian Project encourages 
> > members
> > impacted by recent actions to sign the open letter.  
> 
> Seconded. (Though I'm not fully sure the forms is correct, but maybe it's
> sufficient?!)

I'm definitely open to improvements.

> And then, what does 'cut ties with the foundation' mean exactly? We certainly
> won't stop shipping stuff where the copyright belongs to the FSF 8-) So 
> probably
> this should be specified a bit more?

My understanding is that there is a financial relationship between Debian and
FSF. I don't know if there are further ties beyond individuals choosing to
continue packaging their software.

-- 
Michael Lustfield


pgpoQqvhlkFji.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Holger Levsen]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 10:12:47PM -0500, Michael Lustfield wrote:
> Choice X:
> 
> The Debian Project disapproves of recent and past actions taken by FSF. With
> regards to the latest action (re-acceptance of RMS to the board), it now
> chooses to cut ties with the foundation. The Debian Project encourages members
> impacted by recent actions to sign the open letter.

Seconded. (Though I'm not fully sure the forms is correct, but maybe it's
sufficient?!)
 
And then, what does 'cut ties with the foundation' mean exactly? We certainly
won't stop shipping stuff where the copyright belongs to the FSF 8-) So probably
this should be specified a bit more?

> I would personally choose this because:
> - I have many problems with FSF, beyond this particular concern.
> - The concerns raised are irrelevant to me, but other concerns remain 
> relevant.
> - Many (including DD's) clearly feel personally attacked by recent actions.
> 
> tl;dr -- This is just Choice 2 with a separation from FSF.

I'm not sure how I'd rank this, but I do think this is an important and new
choice for the GR.


-- 
cheers,
Holger

 ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
 ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁   holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
 ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C
 ⠈⠳⣄

Der Mensch is' gut, aber die Leut' san a G'sindel!


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Michael Lustfield]

It bothers me to comment on this at all, but... I would like to propose the
following resolution.

Choice X:

The Debian Project disapproves of recent and past actions taken by FSF. With
regards to the latest action (re-acceptance of RMS to the board), it now
chooses to cut ties with the foundation. The Debian Project encourages members
impacted by recent actions to sign the open letter.


I would personally choose this because:
- I have many problems with FSF, beyond this particular concern.
- The concerns raised are irrelevant to me, but other concerns remain relevant.
- Many (including DD's) clearly feel personally attacked by recent actions.


tl;dr -- This is just Choice 2 with a separation from FSF.


pgplKHyUU6yLJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Hilko Bengen]

* Russ Allbery:

> Sruthi Chandran  writes:
>
>> I have an alternate suggestion. Instead of signing the said letter,
>> Debian can issue a position statement similar to the one released by FSF
>> Europe. [1]
>
>> Will share the amended text if this idea has supporters.
>
>>  [1] https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.html
>
> I'm comfortable with Debian signing the original letter, but as an
> organizational statement, I think I like this one somewhat better.  I
> think an organization should try to express what that organization itself
> is going to do, and this seems clearer on that point.  (Personal
> statements are a bit different.)

+1.

The FSF board has shown remarkable short-sightedness and arrogance in
readmitting RMS. I personally agree that he should no longer assume any
kind of leadership position within the Free Software community, simply
because by now he has lost any moral authority that he may or may not
have had in the past. However, the open letter cited in the GR pushes
the issue way too hard without any positive purpose: The damage to the
FSF has already been done and cannot be repaired.

The Debian project should not call for the removal of the FSF's board.
Neither should Debian urge people to refuse contributing to
FSF/RMS-associated software projects, especially not while we are still
shipping a Linux distribution that is built on such software projects.

If irony was generally acceptable for a GR, the Debian project should
simply offer its condolences to the FSF for having acknowledged its own
irrelevance. Since this does not work, let's keep things simple and go
with something modelled after the FSF's or the EFF's statements

Cheers,
-Hilko

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Christoph Biedl]

Many things have already been said, I'm not going to comment on them.


There is however a particular sentence that gives me a really sour
stomach. It's the second in:

| We urge those in a position to do so to stop supporting the Free Software
| Foundation.  Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS.

To me, that is very vague, and therefore I ask those in favour of that
resolution to not only clarify the meaning but also explain why from
their point of view that meaning should be obvious.

First, this is certainly not meant to be forever. But without a clause
like "until this situation has been resolved", I understand it quite
so.


Second, how should I understand that second sentence? Putting it into
context ...

| We urge those in a position to do so to stop supporting the Free Software
| Foundation.  Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS.

... it can be read as:

| We urge those in a position to do so to (...)
| [r]efuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS.

... or as:

| We (...) [r]efuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS.

... or (not very likely, though) indeed as an imperative (to whom?):

| Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS[!]

Which one is meant? If it's the second there's quite a chance the
signers are acting contradictory. That depends on ...


Last but certainly not least: What's the understanding of "related"
here, or: Which projects are meant by this?

If I understand "related" as "has in a way to do with it", I see a huge
variety of interpretations, for example: Project that are endorsed by
FSF or have been so in the past. Projects that show the FSF as
copyright holder. Projects that use the GNU word in the name, possibly
being part of the GNU project. Or even, since RMS is no doubt the main
inspiration of the idea of open source software, every GPL-licensed
project. Or even Debian itself, to bring this ad absurdum.

So, where is the line? Which projects should fall under this appeal
(first meaning) or boycott (second meaing), which not? How likely will
that hit innocent bystanders?

And I'm a little surprised nobody else seems to have a problem with
this. Perhaps it's just because I'm not a native speaker.

Christoph


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Antoine Beaupré (2021-03-25 20:13:42)
> On 2021-03-25 19:13:09, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > I dislike the conclusive judgemental framing of the previously 
> > referenced open letter, and consider it wrong for Debian as an 
> > organisation to make direct demands on how other organisations 
> > should conduct its business.  I certainly would find it 
> > inappropriate for FSF to make direct demands on how Debian operates.
> 
> Yeah, the FSF or RMS would *never* make direct demands onto how 
> another organization operates, right? 

Your point being what exactly?

My point is that (indeed FSF makes demands on Debian, and) FSF making 
direct demands on how Debian should operate is something I find 
inappropriate (and it triggers other emotions in me as well), and I 
don't want Debian to treat FSF in that same way.

Sorry if I was unclear earlier...


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

signature.asc
Description: signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Sruthi Chandran]

On 26/03/21 2:00 am, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> "Sruthi" == Sruthi Chandran  writes:
> Sruthi> I propose that instead of signing the said letter, Debian
> Sruthi> issue a position statement. The text of the statement is
> Sruthi> adapted from the statements by FSFE and EFF.
>
> Sruthi>  Text of GR 
>
> Sruthi> Release a position statement with the following text.
>
> Can you please propose as an amendment to Steve's GR rather than as a
> separate GR?
> I'd rather have two ballot options than two separate votes.
>
> Also, we generally include the constitutional section (4.1.5) under
> which we're acting in a GR.
> See Sean's message as an example how to do this.
>
> Sruthi> One crucial factor in making our community more inclusive is
> Sruthi> to recognise and reflect when other people are offended or
> Sruthi> harmed by our own actions and consider this feedback in
>
> Would you be willing to drop the word offended from the above?
>
> I think that focusing on offense rather than harm detracts from the
> power of the progressive agenda and of moving for social justice.
> It's not about political correctness or a bunch of people running around
> with sensitive natures taking offense at whatever they can.
> It's about recognizing the pain others are feeling, developing empathy
> with them, and working to reduce that pain and foster respect.
>
> Making it about offense gives people who disagree with social justice
> work an easy way to trivialize what we're doing.
>
> --Sam

Sam,

Thanks for the pointers. Will update accordingly.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Sam Hartman]

> "Sruthi" == Sruthi Chandran  writes:

Sruthi> I propose that instead of signing the said letter, Debian
Sruthi> issue a position statement. The text of the statement is
Sruthi> adapted from the statements by FSFE and EFF.

Sruthi>  Text of GR 

Sruthi> Release a position statement with the following text.

Can you please propose as an amendment to Steve's GR rather than as a
separate GR?
I'd rather have two ballot options than two separate votes.

Also, we generally include the constitutional section (4.1.5) under
which we're acting in a GR.
See Sean's message as an example how to do this.

Sruthi> One crucial factor in making our community more inclusive is
Sruthi> to recognise and reflect when other people are offended or
Sruthi> harmed by our own actions and consider this feedback in

Would you be willing to drop the word offended from the above?

I think that focusing on offense rather than harm detracts from the
power of the progressive agenda and of moving for social justice.
It's not about political correctness or a bunch of people running around
with sensitive natures taking offense at whatever they can.
It's about recognizing the pain others are feeling, developing empathy
with them, and working to reduce that pain and foster respect.

Making it about offense gives people who disagree with social justice
work an easy way to trivialize what we're doing.

--Sam


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Sruthi Chandran]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 26/03/21 12:47 am, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Sruthi Chandran  writes:
>
>> I have an alternate suggestion. Instead of signing the said letter,
>> Debian can issue a position statement similar to the one released by FSF
>> Europe. [1]
>
>> Will share the amended text if this idea has supporters.
>
>>  [1] https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.html
>
> I'm comfortable with Debian signing the original letter, but as an
> organizational statement, I think I like this one somewhat better.  I
> think an organization should try to express what that organization itself
> is going to do, and this seems clearer on that point.  (Personal
> statements are a bit different.)
>
> The EFF statement is also worth reviewing:
>
>
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/03/statement-re-election-richard-stallman-fsf-board
>
> but I think Debian's relationship with the FSF is closer to that of FSFE
> than the EFF, so their statement feels a bit more on point for us.
>
> Thank you for raising this, Sruthi!  I hadn't seen the FSFE's statement
> before your message.
>
I propose that instead of signing the said letter, Debian issue a
position statement. The text of the statement is adapted from the
statements by FSFE and EFF.

 Text of GR 

Release a position statement with the following text.

*Debian’s statement on Richard Stallman rejoining the FSF board*

We at Debian are profoundly disappointed to hear of the re-election of
Richard Stallman to a leadership position at the Free Software
Foundation, after a series of serious accusations of misconduct led to
his resignation as president and board member of the FSF in 2019. We are
also disappointed that this was done despite no discernible steps taken
by him to be accountable for, much less make amends for, his past
actions or those who have been harmed by them. Finally, we are also
disturbed by the secretive process of his re-election, and how it was
belately conveyed [0] to FSF’s staff and supporters.

We believe this step and how it was communicated sends wrong and hurtful
message and harms the future of the Free Software movement. The goal of
the software freedom movement is to empower all people to control
technology and thereby create a better society for everyone. Free
Software is meant to serve everyone regardless of their age, ability or
disability, gender identity, sex, ethnicity, nationality, religion or
sexual orientation. This requires an inclusive and diverse environment
that welcomes all contributors equally. Debian realises that we
ourselves and the Free Software movement still have to work hard to be
in that place where everyone feels safe and respected to participate in
it in order to fulfil the movement's mission.

One crucial factor in making our community more inclusive is to
recognise and reflect when other people are offended or harmed by our
own actions and consider this feedback in future actions. The way
Richard Stallman announced his return to the board unfortunately lacks
any acknowledgement of this kind of thought process, and we are deeply
disappointed that the FSF board did not address these concerns before
electing him a board member again. Overall, we feel the current step
sends the wrong signal to existing and future community members.

That is why, we call for his resignation from all FSF bodies. The FSF
needs to seriously reflect on this decision as well as their
decision-making process to prevent similar issues from happening again.
Therefore, in the current situation we see ourselves unable to
collaborate both with the FSF and any other organisation in which
Richard Stallman has a leading position. Instead, we will continue to
work with groups and individuals who foster diversity and equality in
the Free Software movement in order to achieve our joint goal of
empowering all users to control technology.

[0] https://twitter.com/fsf/status/1374399897558917128

Based on:

[1] https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.html

[2]
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/03/statement-re-election-richard-stallman-fsf-board

 End Text of GR 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQGzBAEBCAAdFiEEcd3Fxr6GmkZB13n+x+ob4VdN7V0FAmBc6nYACgkQx+ob4VdN
7V2DyQv9E5MtX9OIf+RN0a1jy6qk3pl4tvwWeaJQ4h7HiNsXeWT8oWK+REXBwPy/
GZJ5Q2ymmnRMOU70wCEF3a5KNVa0caVHl/5rHCD5+WR4lN8qbKoi4vDo6U9TkfGX
p9Mim30+VEvKHbOG2K0AHwUjGbgGY63S5q2isGcXf2CQIL3ylIPChV9gk65k9QPg
veENNfjac1xL5tkjIX/ekstgJDbpfHmixFJqieazkdFd0rzT7sK6P8zoAsJ1KIbs
mK4SlEA4WJ/3OOdPFHPjE5iVg8iBXixEq8XHtKZ2HY7Ljxw6yjksOpZlbUdrlVEm
mCgzRb6mnv8ZUWo3i7nxtzPpwDCw7LBjRxlpfs17VBdzRptQ9BQgxAN1sU5P9ebq
H/dTTfPhpbmJvwx2cD1UsJIj967pXx1TrOju31ZNBlc+bDx5lGcywljU6Sr/tpYS
ir2UIHyDdcLDeaPaXURww5J+/wIt81SR0lqO65h9ZEzGMgTNuDku9o/pGlazpOce
cKNEIfKL
=ZeE4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Paul R. Tagliamonte]

D'oh!

Due to cascading failures, I had to clearsign to get around some GMail
issues I've been having.  It looks to have line wrapped me, I've attached
the content from above.

Additionally, my key expired, I've pushed an updated key to the
keyservers, as well as Debian's. I thought I did this last month but it
doesn't look to be updated fully. I don't know if it's A, B or A & B that's
flagging for you

  paultag


On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 3:14 PM Kurt Roeckx  wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 05:13:28PM -0400, Paul R. Tagliamonte wrote:
> > > Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the
> body
> > > who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> > > is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just
> > individual
> > > Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> > >
> > > This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting
> the
> > > text from that open letter via GR.
> >
> > I second this GR.
>
> I get a:
> *BAD* signature from: Paul Tagliamonte 
>
>
> Kurt
>
>

-- 
:wq
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> 
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
> Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> 
> This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
> text from that open letter via GR.

I second this GR.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=lgw+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


B7ECF42DDFD98AC7301C062B1101AD5A81369AD7.pubkey
Description: Binary data

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Gard Spreemann]

Sruthi Chandran  writes:

> On March 25, 2021 2:24:16 AM GMT+05:30, Steve Langasek  
> wrote:
>>Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the
>>body
>>who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>>
>>https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
>>is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just
>>individual
>>Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
>>
>>This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting
>>the
>>text from that open letter via GR.
>>
> I have an alternate suggestion. Instead of signing the said letter, Debian 
> can issue a position statement similar to the one released by FSF Europe. [1]
>
> Will share the amended text if this idea has supporters.
>
>  [1] https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.html

Thank you for bringing up the FSF Europe statement, Sruthi!

I personally have grave reservations about the original open letter, but
find the FSF Europe statement much more palatable. I would support a
statement that is more along these lines, but would have trouble
supporting a ratification of the original open letter.


 Best,
 Gard


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 03:19:19PM -0400, Paul R. Tagliamonte wrote:
> D'oh!
> 
> Due to cascading failures, I had to clearsign to get around some GMail
> issues I've been having.  It looks to have line wrapped me, I've attached
> the content from above.
> 
> Additionally, my key expired, I've pushed an updated key to the
> keyservers, as well as Debian's. I thought I did this last month but it
> doesn't look to be updated fully. I don't know if it's A, B or A & B that's
> flagging for you
> 
>   paultag

That resulted in a Good signature.


Kurt

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Antoine Beaupré]

On 2021-03-25 19:13:09, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I dislike the conclusive judgemental framing of the previously 
> referenced open letter, and consider it wrong for Debian as an 
> organisation to make direct demands on how other organisations should 
> conduct its business.  I certainly would find it inappropriate for FSF 
> to make direct demands on how Debian operates.

Yeah, the FSF or RMS would *never* make direct demands onto how another
organization operates, right? 

A.

-- 
Je viens d'un pays où engagé veut dire que tu t'es trouvé une job.
- Patrice Desbiens

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:37:26PM +0100, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Seconded

I get a:
*BAD* signature from: Sylvestre Ledru 
 aka: Sylvestre Ledru 
 aka: Sylvestre Ledru 
 aka: Sylvestre Ledru 
 aka: Sylvestre Ledru 
 aka: Sylvestre Ledru 
 aka: Sylvestre Ledru 
 aka: Sylvestre Ledru 


Kurt

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Russ Allbery]

Sruthi Chandran  writes:

> I have an alternate suggestion. Instead of signing the said letter,
> Debian can issue a position statement similar to the one released by FSF
> Europe. [1]

> Will share the amended text if this idea has supporters.

>  [1] https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.html

I'm comfortable with Debian signing the original letter, but as an
organizational statement, I think I like this one somewhat better.  I
think an organization should try to express what that organization itself
is going to do, and this seems clearer on that point.  (Personal
statements are a bit different.)

The EFF statement is also worth reviewing:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/03/statement-re-election-richard-stallman-fsf-board

but I think Debian's relationship with the FSF is closer to that of FSFE
than the EFF, so their statement feels a bit more on point for us.

Thank you for raising this, Sruthi!  I hadn't seen the FSFE's statement
before your message.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)  

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 05:13:28PM -0400, Paul R. Tagliamonte wrote:
> > Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> > who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> >
> >
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> > is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just
> individual
> > Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> >
> > This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
> > text from that open letter via GR.
> 
> I second this GR.

I get a:
*BAD* signature from: Paul Tagliamonte 


Kurt

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Gard Spreemann]

Jonas Smedegaard  writes:

> Quoting Sruthi Chandran (2021-03-25 18:29:32)
>> 
>> 
>> On March 25, 2021 2:24:16 AM GMT+05:30, Steve Langasek  
>> wrote:
>> >Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the 
>> >body who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>> >
>> >https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
>> > 
>> >is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just 
>> >individual Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
>> >
>> >This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by 
>> >adopting the text from that open letter via GR.
>> >
>> I have an alternate suggestion. Instead of signing the said letter, 
>> Debian can issue a position statement similar to the one released by 
>> FSF Europe. [1]
>> 
>> Will share the amended text if this idea has supporters.
>> 
>>  [1] https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.html
>
> I would support a position letter similar to that of FSF Europe, and 
> appreciate if you could draft that, Sruthi.

Seconded.

I have big reservations about the original letter, but find the FSF
Europe one much more appropriate.


 -- Gard
 



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Sruthi Chandran (2021-03-25 18:29:32)
> 
> 
> On March 25, 2021 2:24:16 AM GMT+05:30, Steve Langasek  
> wrote:
> >Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the 
> >body who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> >
> >https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> > 
> >is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just 
> >individual Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> >
> >This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by 
> >adopting the text from that open letter via GR.
> >
> I have an alternate suggestion. Instead of signing the said letter, 
> Debian can issue a position statement similar to the one released by 
> FSF Europe. [1]
> 
> Will share the amended text if this idea has supporters.
> 
>  [1] https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.html

I would support a position letter similar to that of FSF Europe, and 
appreciate if you could draft that, Sruthi.

I dislike the conclusive judgemental framing of the previously 
referenced open letter, and consider it wrong for Debian as an 
organisation to make direct demands on how other organisations should 
conduct its business.  I certainly would find it inappropriate for FSF 
to make direct demands on how Debian operates.

I like the different tone of the letter by FSF Europe, not demanding but 
instead distancing itself and making clear why (without using specific 
labels as if some court ruling had already taken place, which is not the 
case).


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

signature.asc
Description: signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Sruthi Chandran]

On March 25, 2021 2:24:16 AM GMT+05:30, Steve Langasek  
wrote:
>Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the
>body
>who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
>https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
>is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just
>individual
>Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
>
>This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting
>the
>text from that open letter via GR.
>
I have an alternate suggestion. Instead of signing the said letter, Debian can 
issue a position statement similar to the one released by FSF Europe. [1]

Will share the amended text if this idea has supporters.

 [1] https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.html

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Bart Martens]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 11:25:19PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Can't you just express your opinion by yourself, by signing the letter?

I'm with Thomas on this.

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Jonathan Carter (highvoltage)]

Dear project secretary

On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 13:54:16 -0700
Steve Langasek  wrote:
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the
> body who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.

Due to the timeliness of this GR, please reduce the discussion period
for this GR to one week.

Thanks,

-Jonathan, Debian Project Leader


pgpD_j4_fBdYG.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Thomas Goirand]

On 3/24/21 10:00 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> 
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
> Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> 
> This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
> text from that open letter via GR.

>From the text:

"It is time for RMS to step back from the free software, tech ethics,
digital rights, and tech communities, for he cannot provide the
leadership we need."

While probably the readmission of RMS was probably a step in the wrong
direction, asking for RMS to "step back" from any tech communities and
free software in general is disgusting.

And by getting this as a GR, it feels like promoting the cancel culture
in Debian. :/

Can't you just express your opinion by yourself, by signing the letter?

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Paul Tagliamonte]

Confirmed.

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:33 PM Steve Langasek  wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote :
> > > Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the
> body
> > > who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> > >
> > >
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> > > is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just
> individual
> > > Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> > >
> > > This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting
> the
> > > text from that open letter via GR.
> > >
> > >  Text of GR 
> > >
> > > The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
> > > readmission to the FSF seen at
> > >
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
>
> > > The text of this statement is given below.
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > >  End Text of GR 
>
> > Seconded.
>
> > (I'll also second an amended text with s/FSF/FSF board/ or equivalent
> > correction)
>
> I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which was missed on
> accident by me) and would ask the seconders to confirm their acceptance of
> this amendment so we can avoid any unnecessary extra variations on the GR
> ballot.
>
> --
> Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
> Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
> Ubuntu Developer   https://www.debian.org/
> slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
>

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Joerg Jaspert]

On 16082 March 1977, Steve Langasek wrote:


I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which was missed on
accident by me) and would ask the seconders to confirm their 
acceptance of
this amendment so we can avoid any unnecessary extra variations on the 
GR

ballot.


Confirmed.

--
bye, Joerg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Sylvestre Ledru]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.

https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
Debian developers, should consider signing on to.

This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
text from that open letter via GR.

 Text of GR 

The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
readmission to the FSF seen at
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.

The text of this statement is given below.

Richard M. Stallman, frequently known as RMS, has been a dangerous force in
the free software community for a long time.  He has shown himself to be
misogynist, ableist, and transphobic, among other serious accusations of
impropriety.  These sorts of beliefs have no place in the free software,
digital rights, and tech communities.  With his recent reinstatement to the
Board of Directors of the Free Software Foundation, we call for the entire
Board of the FSF to step down and for RMS to be removed from all leadership
positions.

We, the undersigned, believe in the necessity of digital autonomy and the
powerful role user freedom plays in protecting our fundamental human
rights.
In order to realize the promise of everything software freedom makes
possible, there must be radical change within the community.  We believe in
a present and a future where all technology empowers – not oppresses –
people.  We know that this is only possible in a world where technology is
built to pay respect to our rights at its most foundational levels.  While
these ideas have been popularized in some form by Richard M. Stallman, he
does not speak for us.  We do not condone his actions and opinions.  We do
not acknowledge his leadership or the leadership of the Free Software
Foundation as it stands today.

There has been enough tolerance of RMS’s repugnant ideas and
behavior.  We
cannot continue to let one person ruin the meaning of our work.  Our
communities have no space for people like Richard M. Stallman, and we will
not continue suffering his behavior, giving him a leadership role, or
otherwise holding him and his hurtful and dangerous ideology as acceptable.

We are calling for the removal of the entire Board of the Free Software
Foundation.  These are people who have enabled and empowered RMS for
years.
They demonstrate this again by permitting him to rejoin the FSF Board.  It
is time for RMS to step back from the free software, tech ethics, digital
rights, and tech communities, for he cannot provide the leadership we need.
We are also calling for Richard M. Stallman to be removed from all
leadership positions, including the GNU Project.

We urge those in a position to do so to stop supporting the Free Software
Foundation.  Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS.
Do not speak at or attend FSF events, or events that welcome RMS and his
brand of intolerance.  We ask for contributors to free software projects to
take a stand against bigotry and hate within their projects.  While doing
these things, tell these communities and the FSF why.

We have detailed several public incidents of RMS's behavior.  Some of us
have our own stories about RMS and our interactions with him, things that
are not captured in email threads or on video.  We hope you will read what
has been shared and consider the harm that he has done to our community and
others.

 End Text of GR 

Seconded

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEtg21mU05vsTRqVzPfmUo2nUvG+EFAmBbsQcACgkQfmUo2nUv
G+H5Dw//VX+0UbQJj/d2FJvZWG3qK6Z0ea0p/7EDgN/TH4OZuKjLp1BDYv9IOt6f
6tY8D92yKhJovCPgOerumlOAcX8MhcePgNab4DbJkuupIaXMsFis8GGZvdDwI/MV
gQ/KhEav/rGRNsYcrQQ1eUVp7e3IVrhPY8QcJc88msemkA5lBNx0VaMgHXq+Hbap
siaOMc6wQ5LCMyJ7QXM58kXcaNUc3DZH32yUJhRyHtR8rgKaz2t8MXN640L9eamN
UjlPxpFsLGpq71/U3GHRzAWWOVIdg2MS5bBqqtsEn2Uzz6z9CQkjc+NCrb2fyYyg
gRmw/LfAaKKS8i0WNM+A1d1V6U8tWUbeoq5tZQf2RkeeL3yl9lgl97el/WM0GSc8
uKIBWDlr8pAyPvqabEpssIzfRkJ3W2kc4jSzWHnbgnhCFyihPQ0ffoQlso9vSv5X
Ze5DcW7sgRd6FZpZ1D5V6FVmzp4At/adfYLagTLo8bfQNnChCg1/k/7sQz23xRfk
TYEol4sMUPgzQkXH7z7qUpCax9R0puLnKtuBEpT98VbjBjXbdGpp5YhAyZT7GbGk
G8FQJ490kTWeG4to6RrBD7x/8e3XEiXZzQLJuKNbPtLmQtHKzWIKgZsqLI4H5F/1
HSfziXsInQRjqLJ6eJcxdupMfLM3NUJPeXESFUvhpqVmCmRpHCM=
=8vht
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Colin Tuckley]

On 24/03/2021 21:33, Steve Langasek wrote:

> I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which was missed on
> accident by me) and would ask the seconders to confirm their acceptance of
> this amendment so we can avoid any unnecessary extra variations on the GR
> ballot.

amendment also seconded.

Colin

-- 
Colin Tuckley | +44(0)1223 830814 |  PGP/GnuPG Key Id
G8TMV | +44(0)7799 143369 | 0xFA0C410738C9D903




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Louis-Philippe Véronneau]

On 2021-03-24 17 h 33, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote :
>>> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
>>> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
>>> is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
>>> Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
>>>
>>> This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
>>> text from that open letter via GR.
>>>
>>>  Text of GR 
>>>
>>> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
>>> readmission to the FSF seen at
>>> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
>>>  
>>> The text of this statement is given below.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>  End Text of GR 
> 
>> Seconded.
> 
>> (I'll also second an amended text with s/FSF/FSF board/ or equivalent
>> correction)
> 
> I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which was missed on
> accident by me) and would ask the seconders to confirm their acceptance 
of
> this amendment so we can avoid any unnecessary extra variations on the GR
> ballot.
> 

Seconded.

-- 
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Louis-Philippe Véronneau
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   po...@debian.org / veronneau.org
  ⠈⠳⣄



OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Steve McIntyre]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 02:33:19PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
>
>> Seconded.
>
>> (I'll also second an amended text with s/FSF/FSF board/ or equivalent
>> correction)
>
>I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which was missed on
>accident by me) and would ask the seconders to confirm their acceptance of
>this amendment so we can avoid any unnecessary extra variations on the GR
>ballot.

Seconded on that change

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
"I can't ever sleep on planes ... call it irrational if you like, but I'm
 afraid I'll miss my stop" -- Vivek Das Mohapatra


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Steve Langasek]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote :
> > Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> > who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> > 
> > https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> > is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
> > Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> > 
> > This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
> > text from that open letter via GR.
> > 
> >  Text of GR 
> > 
> > The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
> > readmission to the FSF seen at
> > https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
> >  
> > The text of this statement is given below.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >  End Text of GR 

> Seconded.

> (I'll also second an amended text with s/FSF/FSF board/ or equivalent
> correction)

I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which was missed on
accident by me) and would ask the seconders to confirm their acceptance of
this amendment so we can avoid any unnecessary extra variations on the GR
ballot.

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer   https://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Paul R. Tagliamonte]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
>
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just
individual
> Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
>
> This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
> text from that open letter via GR.

I second this GR.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=lgw+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Colin Tuckley]

On 24/03/2021 20:54, Steve Langasek wrote:

> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> 
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
> Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> 
> This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
> text from that open letter via GR.

Seconded.

-- 
Colin Tuckley | +44(0)1223 830814 |  PGP/GnuPG Key Id
G8TMV | +44(0)7799 143369 | 0xFA0C410738C9D903






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Nicolas Dandrimont]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote :
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> 
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
> Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
> 
> This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
> text from that open letter via GR.
> 
>  Text of GR 
> 
> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
> readmission to the FSF seen at
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
>  
> The text of this statement is given below.
>
> [...]
>
>  End Text of GR 

Seconded.

(I'll also second an amended text with s/FSF/FSF board/ or equivalent 
correction)

Thank you,
Nicolas


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Sam Hartman]

> "Steve" == Steve Langasek  writes:

Steve>  Text of GR 

Steve> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard
Steve> Stallman's readmission to the FSF seen at
Steve> 
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
Steve> The text of this statement is given below.

Seconded.

My second also applies is the word board is inserted after FSF above.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Steve McIntyre]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
>who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
>https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
>is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
>Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
>
>This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
>text from that open letter via GR.

Seconded.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
The two hard things in computing:
 * naming things
 * cache invalidation
 * off-by-one errors  -- Stig Sandbeck Mathisen


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Neil McGovern]

Please, as a previous vote runner, can we only have 5 seconders rather
than the (currently) 82 DDs who have signed it so far?

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>  Text of GR 
> 
> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
> readmission to the FSF seen at
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
>  
> The text of this statement is given below.
> 
> Richard M. Stallman, frequently known as RMS, has been a dangerous force in
> the free software community for a long time.  He has shown himself to be
> misogynist, ableist, and transphobic, among other serious accusations of
> impropriety.  These sorts of beliefs have no place in the free software,
> digital rights, and tech communities.  With his recent reinstatement to the
> Board of Directors of the Free Software Foundation, we call for the entire
> Board of the FSF to step down and for RMS to be removed from all leadership
> positions.
> 
> We, the undersigned, believe in the necessity of digital autonomy and the
> powerful role user freedom plays in protecting our fundamental human rights. 
> In order to realize the promise of everything software freedom makes
> possible, there must be radical change within the community.  We believe in
> a present and a future where all technology empowers – not oppresses –
> people.  We know that this is only possible in a world where technology is
> built to pay respect to our rights at its most foundational levels.  While
> these ideas have been popularized in some form by Richard M. Stallman, he
> does not speak for us.  We do not condone his actions and opinions.  We do
> not acknowledge his leadership or the leadership of the Free Software
> Foundation as it stands today.
> 
> There has been enough tolerance of RMS’s repugnant ideas and behavior.  We
> cannot continue to let one person ruin the meaning of our work.  Our
> communities have no space for people like Richard M. Stallman, and we will
> not continue suffering his behavior, giving him a leadership role, or
> otherwise holding him and his hurtful and dangerous ideology as acceptable.
> 
> We are calling for the removal of the entire Board of the Free Software
> Foundation.  These are people who have enabled and empowered RMS for years. 
> They demonstrate this again by permitting him to rejoin the FSF Board.  It
> is time for RMS to step back from the free software, tech ethics, digital
> rights, and tech communities, for he cannot provide the leadership we need. 
> We are also calling for Richard M. Stallman to be removed from all
> leadership positions, including the GNU Project.
> 
> We urge those in a position to do so to stop supporting the Free Software
> Foundation.  Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS. 
> Do not speak at or attend FSF events, or events that welcome RMS and his
> brand of intolerance.  We ask for contributors to free software projects to
> take a stand against bigotry and hate within their projects.  While doing
> these things, tell these communities and the FSF why.
> 
> We have detailed several public incidents of RMS's behavior.  Some of us
> have our own stories about RMS and our interactions with him, things that
> are not captured in email threads or on video.  We hope you will read what
> has been shared and consider the harm that he has done to our community and
> others.
> 
>  End Text of GR 

I second this GR.

Neil
-- 


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Joerg Jaspert]

On 16082 March 1977, Steve Langasek wrote:

Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the 
body

who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.

https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just 
individual

Debian developers, should consider signing on to.


This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting 
the

text from that open letter via GR.


Seconded.



 Text of GR 

The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
readmission to the FSF seen at
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md. 
The text of this statement is given below.


Richard M. Stallman, frequently known as RMS, has been a dangerous 
force in
the free software community for a long time.  He has shown himself to 
be
misogynist, ableist, and transphobic, among other serious accusations 
of
impropriety.  These sorts of beliefs have no place in the free 
software,
digital rights, and tech communities.  With his recent reinstatement 
to the
Board of Directors of the Free Software Foundation, we call for the 
entire
Board of the FSF to step down and for RMS to be removed from all 
leadership

positions.

We, the undersigned, believe in the necessity of digital autonomy and 
the
powerful role user freedom plays in protecting our fundamental human 
rights. 
In order to realize the promise of everything software freedom makes
possible, there must be radical change within the community.  We 
believe in

a present and a future where all technology empowers – not oppresses –
people.  We know that this is only possible in a world where 
technology is
built to pay respect to our rights at its most foundational levels. 
While
these ideas have been popularized in some form by Richard M. Stallman, 
he
does not speak for us.  We do not condone his actions and opinions. 
We do

not acknowledge his leadership or the leadership of the Free Software
Foundation as it stands today.

There has been enough tolerance of RMS’s repugnant ideas and behavior. 
We

cannot continue to let one person ruin the meaning of our work.  Our
communities have no space for people like Richard M. Stallman, and we 
will

not continue suffering his behavior, giving him a leadership role, or
otherwise holding him and his hurtful and dangerous ideology as 
acceptable.


We are calling for the removal of the entire Board of the Free 
Software
Foundation.  These are people who have enabled and empowered RMS for 
years. 
They demonstrate this again by permitting him to rejoin the FSF Board. 
It
is time for RMS to step back from the free software, tech ethics, 
digital
rights, and tech communities, for he cannot provide the leadership we 
need. 
We are also calling for Richard M. Stallman to be removed from all

leadership positions, including the GNU Project.

We urge those in a position to do so to stop supporting the Free 
Software
Foundation.  Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and 
RMS. 
Do not speak at or attend FSF events, or events that welcome RMS and 
his
brand of intolerance.  We ask for contributors to free software 
projects to
take a stand against bigotry and hate within their projects.  While 
doing

these things, tell these communities and the FSF why.

We have detailed several public incidents of RMS's behavior.  Some of 
us
have our own stories about RMS and our interactions with him, things 
that
are not captured in email threads or on video.  We hope you will read 
what
has been shared and consider the harm that he has done to our 
community and

others.

 End Text of GR 

--
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a 
Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the 
world.
Ubuntu Developer 
https://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com 
vor...@debian.org


--
bye, Joerg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Louis-Philippe Véronneau]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 2021-03-24 16 h 54, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
> Debian developers, should consider signing on to.
>
> This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
> text from that open letter via GR.
>
>  Text of GR 
>
> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
> readmission to the FSF seen at
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
> The text of this statement is given below.
>
> Richard M. Stallman, frequently known as RMS, has been a dangerous force in
> the free software community for a long time.  He has shown himself to be
> misogynist, ableist, and transphobic, among other serious accusations of
> impropriety.  These sorts of beliefs have no place in the free software,
> digital rights, and tech communities.  With his recent reinstatement to the
> Board of Directors of the Free Software Foundation, we call for the entire
> Board of the FSF to step down and for RMS to be removed from all leadership
> positions.
>
> We, the undersigned, believe in the necessity of digital autonomy and the
> powerful role user freedom plays in protecting our fundamental human rights.
> In order to realize the promise of everything software freedom makes
> possible, there must be radical change within the community.  We believe in
> a present and a future where all technology empowers – not oppresses –
> people.  We know that this is only possible in a world where technology is
> built to pay respect to our rights at its most foundational levels.  While
> these ideas have been popularized in some form by Richard M. Stallman, he
> does not speak for us.  We do not condone his actions and opinions.  We do
> not acknowledge his leadership or the leadership of the Free Software
> Foundation as it stands today.
>
> There has been enough tolerance of RMS’s repugnant ideas and behavior.  We
> cannot continue to let one person ruin the meaning of our work.  Our
> communities have no space for people like Richard M. Stallman, and we will
> not continue suffering his behavior, giving him a leadership role, or
> otherwise holding him and his hurtful and dangerous ideology as acceptable.
>
> We are calling for the removal of the entire Board of the Free Software
> Foundation.  These are people who have enabled and empowered RMS for years.
> They demonstrate this again by permitting him to rejoin the FSF Board.  It
> is time for RMS to step back from the free software, tech ethics, digital
> rights, and tech communities, for he cannot provide the leadership we need.
> We are also calling for Richard M. Stallman to be removed from all
> leadership positions, including the GNU Project.
>
> We urge those in a position to do so to stop supporting the Free Software
> Foundation.  Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS.
> Do not speak at or attend FSF events, or events that welcome RMS and his
> brand of intolerance.  We ask for contributors to free software projects to
> take a stand against bigotry and hate within their projects.  While doing
> these things, tell these communities and the FSF why.
>
> We have detailed several public incidents of RMS's behavior.  Some of us
> have our own stories about RMS and our interactions with him, things that
> are not captured in email threads or on video.  We hope you will read what
> has been shared and consider the harm that he has done to our community and
> others.
>
>  End Text of GR 
>

I am happy to sponsor this proposition.

- -- 
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Louis-Philippe Véronneau
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   po...@debian.org / veronneau.org
  ⠈⠳⣄
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=ZAJX
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

General resolution: ratify https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io

[Steve Langasek]

Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.

https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
Debian developers, should consider signing on to.

This is a proposal for Debian to sign on to the statement, by adopting the
text from that open letter via GR.

 Text of GR 

The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
readmission to the FSF seen at
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
 
The text of this statement is given below.

Richard M. Stallman, frequently known as RMS, has been a dangerous force in
the free software community for a long time.  He has shown himself to be
misogynist, ableist, and transphobic, among other serious accusations of
impropriety.  These sorts of beliefs have no place in the free software,
digital rights, and tech communities.  With his recent reinstatement to the
Board of Directors of the Free Software Foundation, we call for the entire
Board of the FSF to step down and for RMS to be removed from all leadership
positions.

We, the undersigned, believe in the necessity of digital autonomy and the
powerful role user freedom plays in protecting our fundamental human rights. 
In order to realize the promise of everything software freedom makes
possible, there must be radical change within the community.  We believe in
a present and a future where all technology empowers – not oppresses –
people.  We know that this is only possible in a world where technology is
built to pay respect to our rights at its most foundational levels.  While
these ideas have been popularized in some form by Richard M. Stallman, he
does not speak for us.  We do not condone his actions and opinions.  We do
not acknowledge his leadership or the leadership of the Free Software
Foundation as it stands today.

There has been enough tolerance of RMS’s repugnant ideas and behavior.  We
cannot continue to let one person ruin the meaning of our work.  Our
communities have no space for people like Richard M. Stallman, and we will
not continue suffering his behavior, giving him a leadership role, or
otherwise holding him and his hurtful and dangerous ideology as acceptable.

We are calling for the removal of the entire Board of the Free Software
Foundation.  These are people who have enabled and empowered RMS for years. 
They demonstrate this again by permitting him to rejoin the FSF Board.  It
is time for RMS to step back from the free software, tech ethics, digital
rights, and tech communities, for he cannot provide the leadership we need. 
We are also calling for Richard M. Stallman to be removed from all
leadership positions, including the GNU Project.

We urge those in a position to do so to stop supporting the Free Software
Foundation.  Refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS. 
Do not speak at or attend FSF events, or events that welcome RMS and his
brand of intolerance.  We ask for contributors to free software projects to
take a stand against bigotry and hate within their projects.  While doing
these things, tell these communities and the FSF why.

We have detailed several public incidents of RMS's behavior.  Some of us
have our own stories about RMS and our interactions with him, things that
are not captured in email threads or on video.  We hope you will read what
has been shared and consider the harm that he has done to our community and
others.

 End Text of GR 

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer   https://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature