Mike Gerwitz <m...@gnu.org> writes: > The FSF does provide essential resources for the GNU Project, but it has > no say in how the project is governed. Those decisions must be made by > rms.
It's important to remember that one of the "essential resources" is the GNU trademark itself, which means that the FSF has the final say over who/what can use it and who/what cannot. While this "say" is typically ceded to RMS, that is at the FSF's sufferance, legally. So - worst case - the FSF could revoke RMS's permission to use the GNU trademark and effectively remove him from the GNU project. I don't ever expect this to happen (and hope it doesn't) but I'm not going to agree that the FSF has "no say in how the project is governed" when they legally/effectively have the power to choose the leader. Perhaps remedying this is something that could be added to the governance discussion - how the GNU leader is chosen, what powers the FSF is required to cede, and how to enforce those.
