Re: Debian-vote: GRs, discussion and voting periods - a plea for calm
someone brought this up on IRC and I replied... [23:01] < h01ger> he apologized in private, so i'm fine. mistakes happen all the time. -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C ⠈⠳⣄ The greatest danger in times of turbulence is not the turbulence; it is to act with yesterdays logic. (Peter Drucker) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: opinion on Choice 1
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 03:09:10PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > On Tue, 2021-03-30 at 12:18 +0200, Ulrike Uhlig wrote: > > People without voting rights repeatedly tried to lobby or push for a > > certain agenda on this list. > Welcome to Debian. > People are free to express their opinion, even if they are not owning > an @debian.org email address. And that is actually a very good thing. > The interested reader is able to filter messages and maybe maintain a > list of people to ignore if needed. It might be annoying for you, but > free speech is not always fun. People are free to express their opinion. That does not mean the Debian Project is obligated to provide a platform for those opinions on the debian-vote mailing list, which exists to facilitate discussions among voting members of the Debian Project regarding matters that will be voted on. Non-voting posters to debian-vote are almost exclusively outside agitators and there's no reason subscribing to debian-vote should mean receiving their bullshit in our mailboxes. -- 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: What does FD Mean
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 10:20:15PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 09:49:01PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 11:29:58PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: > > > I'd rather have a None of the Above default option all the time along > > > with FD. It'd probably help. > > > > FD effectively is the same as "none of the above". > > Not really, what FD means is: "I vote yes for all of options I ranked higher > than it, and no for all I ranked lower". > > Our voting scheme is a mix of Condorcet, and yes/no. An option must get at > least 50% or 75% of "yes" votes, no matter if it's Condorcet winner. > > This meaning is mostly destroyed by interpreting FD as "Further Discussion" > -- it makes people put all other options on the front, instead of just ones > they agree with. There are 2 ways the FD option has an effect on the result. The first option is the quorum requirement. For a GR the quorum is 3*Q, which is around 47 for this vote. 3*Q people need to put the option above FD to meet the quorum, or the option is dropped. But the reason for yes/no is the majority requirement. In this GR all options have a majority ratio of 1. This means more people need to put the option above of FD than people who put the option below FD, or the option gets dropped. Note that you can rank the option the same as FD, which is neither yes nor no. So it's more than 50% of those votes that voted yes or no for that option that need to vote yes for the option to be considered. There are also 2:1 and 3:1 majority requirements, which you could translate as 66.6% and 75% need to say yes. Kurt
Re: Debian-vote: GRs, discussion and voting periods - a plea for calm
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 06:36:40PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > I _am_ a member of the community team. oh dear. [I'm not really able to express what I feel having a private mail exposed by you. I hope for a honest mistake but even then I'd be disappointed. I'll leave it at this.] because you cannot have community if you disrespect privacy. -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C ⠈⠳⣄ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#986382: DPL Jonathan Carter's passport number is *******
Hi guys, Please stop replying. That is a troll, will be banned quickly, dont maintain it alive. Just ignore, listmaster and bts will do what is needed. Keep power for other more interesting things. Regards Le 04/04/2021 à 23:18, crazy.mo...@lavache.com a écrit : If you don't want these ego-maniacs to use your name in their vendettas you can resign from Debian. This is the choice. How many people will resign if Debian votes to attack Stallman? Please tell us before the vote finishes so we call can know this now. No matter the outcome of this vote. Having the vote at all suggests that people are expendable. Volunteers can be hung over the side of the ship while people have an email argument about what to do next. Why don't you understand how toxic this is? There are so many years of defamation in Debian now. Delete it all now. Delete the negative options from the vote now. Please stop or we stop you. From: Stephan Lachnit To: crazy.mo...@lavache.com Subject: Re: Bug#986382: DPL Jonathan Carter's passport number is *** Date: 04/04/2021 22:38:20 Europe/Paris Cc: 986...@bugs.debian.org; debian-de...@lists.debian.org > Why does the toxic woman want to destroy reputations? If you refer to Jonathan Carter, that isn't even the person that started the vote, nor an original author of the open letter. Do your research, tbh to me it seems like you are a complete outsider. > Destroy nobody - Or destroy everybody! You can't have it both ways. First of all, nobody wants to "destroy" RMS. Calling someone to resign isn't destroying them, especially if they were just (secretly) elected. Secondly, why are you so toxic and want to "destroy" everybody? There is really no point, all you do is make the FLOSS community weaker and more divided. And since you seem to care about RMS and his ideas, I don't think that is something you would like. > If Debian is a vehicle for defamation, every one of you faces full consequences. Debian is a democracy. Assume one person votes in favor of RMS (which as you can see some people will do), why do you want them to face your alleged consequences? That doesn't make sense. They have no power to do the things you ask for. In fact, nobody in Debian has. Again, I don't think you understand the Debian project at all. > Your jobs are the targets. Your families are targets. I can understand that you are angry even if I don't agree with your views, but I don't think anyone here wants to harm RMS. Everyone here just wants the best for the FLOSS community. Why do you want to harm them so badly? Opinions on how what's the best for the community may differ, but that's fine. Discussions are healthy, as long as they stay friendly (btw your mails aren't). I have learned a lot from discussions, and yes sometimes people (me included) get unfriendly or say things that turn out to be false. But as long as we apologize for mistakes, we can grow from it. > No volunteer should have to suffer you toxic people Don't you think, just maybe, that we shouldn't suffer from your toxicity as well? Especially since we will suffer much more than you can ever suffer from this. I mean, what's the worst that can happen from your point of view? RMS resigns again? Then everything would be just like a month ago. Regards, Stephan
Re: Bug#986382: DPL Jonathan Carter's passport number is *******
If you don't want these ego-maniacs to use your name in their vendettas you can resign from Debian. This is the choice. How many people will resign if Debian votes to attack Stallman? Please tell us before the vote finishes so we call can know this now. No matter the outcome of this vote. Having the vote at all suggests that people are expendable. Volunteers can be hung over the side of the ship while people have an email argument about what to do next. Why don't you understand how toxic this is? There are so many years of defamation in Debian now. Delete it all now. Delete the negative options from the vote now. Please stop or we stop you. From: Stephan Lachnit To: crazy.mo...@lavache.com Subject: Re: Bug#986382: DPL Jonathan Carter's passport number is *** Date: 04/04/2021 22:38:20 Europe/Paris Cc: 986...@bugs.debian.org; debian-de...@lists.debian.org > Why does the toxic woman want to destroy reputations? If you refer to Jonathan Carter, that isn't even the person that started the vote, nor an original author of the open letter. Do your research, tbh to me it seems like you are a complete outsider. > Destroy nobody - Or destroy everybody! You can't have it both ways. First of all, nobody wants to "destroy" RMS. Calling someone to resign isn't destroying them, especially if they were just (secretly) elected. Secondly, why are you so toxic and want to "destroy" everybody? There is really no point, all you do is make the FLOSS community weaker and more divided. And since you seem to care about RMS and his ideas, I don't think that is something you would like. > If Debian is a vehicle for defamation, every one of you faces full > consequences. Debian is a democracy. Assume one person votes in favor of RMS (which as you can see some people will do), why do you want them to face your alleged consequences? That doesn't make sense. They have no power to do the things you ask for. In fact, nobody in Debian has. Again, I don't think you understand the Debian project at all. > Your jobs are the targets. Your families are targets. I can understand that you are angry even if I don't agree with your views, but I don't think anyone here wants to harm RMS. Everyone here just wants the best for the FLOSS community. Why do you want to harm them so badly? Opinions on how what's the best for the community may differ, but that's fine. Discussions are healthy, as long as they stay friendly (btw your mails aren't). I have learned a lot from discussions, and yes sometimes people (me included) get unfriendly or say things that turn out to be false. But as long as we apologize for mistakes, we can grow from it. > No volunteer should have to suffer you toxic people Don't you think, just maybe, that we shouldn't suffer from your toxicity as well? Especially since we will suffer much more than you can ever suffer from this. I mean, what's the worst that can happen from your point of view? RMS resigns again? Then everything would be just like a month ago. Regards, Stephan
Re: What does FD Mean
Le dimanche 04 avril 2021 à 21:49:01+0200, Wouter Verhelst a écrit : > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 11:29:58PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: > > I'd rather have a None of the Above default option all the time along > > with FD. It'd probably help. > > FD effectively is the same as "none of the above". > > You might believe that the subject is stupid and that the horse is dead > and we shop stop flogging it, but the fact that we got it to a vote in > the first place proves that there are people who disagree with you, and > they will translate NOTA winning into "we haven't found the right answer > yet, so let's try this again, for real this time". > > That's further discussion, just under a different name. I'd rather have > an option that is honest with everyone and declares what will in effect > happen. > > If you want an option that says "no, not now, not ever", you need to put > it on the ballot. To me there is a big difference in theory and semantically, but I agree that practically these are the same. IMHO, "None of the Above" => all ballot options are discarded. From there, either people want to keep discussing the matter and new ballot options should be proposed, or the GR becomes moot. FD => hey, for now people are not convinced enough to vote, let's redo a X weeks discussion. -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: What does FD Mean
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 09:49:01PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 11:29:58PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: > > I'd rather have a None of the Above default option all the time along > > with FD. It'd probably help. > > FD effectively is the same as "none of the above". Not really, what FD means is: "I vote yes for all of options I ranked higher than it, and no for all I ranked lower". Our voting scheme is a mix of Condorcet, and yes/no. An option must get at least 50% or 75% of "yes" votes, no matter if it's Condorcet winner. This meaning is mostly destroyed by interpreting FD as "Further Discussion" -- it makes people put all other options on the front, instead of just ones they agree with. Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ .--[ Makefile ] ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ # beware of races ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ all: pillage burn ⠈⠳⣄ `
Re: Question to the DPL candiates: secret ballots
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 05:01:28PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: >On 4/2/21 4:07 PM, Charles Plessy wrote: >> >> Is that paranoia ? > >Yes it is. If only it was. >I don't think 3 letters agency cares about a Debian statement for RMS, >neither they would care who voted what for our CoC or welcoming everyone >GR, or even who voted for systemd. And you know what? It's also possible >that the vast majority of DDs don't care about these as well... (just >see how many didn't care voting...) > >> This said, I think it is time to vote anonymously. > >I may be a dissonant voice in the current discussion, but at least *I* >do not mind if my vote is disclosed: I take the full responsibilities >attached to my voting, and I'm ok for other DDs to know my opinion. I >would understand if anyone fears harassment after the vote if it is >disclosed, and that would be a good reason, but I do not share the view >that there's a high risk for this to happen. This vote is a lot less >important than many in these threads think. A number of our developers have already been receiving *nasty* threatening mails from morons out there due to involvement in the RMS debate. I won't say which "side" of the RMS discussion those morons were claiming to support (you can probably guess!), but that's not important here. Against such a background, I can certainly understand people being intimidated into choosing not to vote publically. You (and I) may not feel directly affected by such threats, but that does not make them any less real. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Armed with "Valor": "Centurion" represents quality of Discipline, Honor, Integrity and Loyalty. Now you don't have to be a Caesar to concord the digital world while feeling safe and proud. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Secret ballot and RMS Resolution
Hi, On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 03:06:07PM +, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > Could we get a Constitution Amendment GR passed along the lines of the > following? > > Provided that 2*Q developers demand it, votes are kept secret after > the vote ended. I would actually prefer it to be easier: If one developer demands it, the votes will be kept secret, *unless* N developers oppose the secrecy of the vote (with the definition of N being up for debate). I think it may be more important to make people feel safe to express their vote than to keep the process open. -- To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy -- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard
Re: What does FD Mean
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 11:29:58PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: > I'd rather have a None of the Above default option all the time along > with FD. It'd probably help. FD effectively is the same as "none of the above". You might believe that the subject is stupid and that the horse is dead and we shop stop flogging it, but the fact that we got it to a vote in the first place proves that there are people who disagree with you, and they will translate NOTA winning into "we haven't found the right answer yet, so let's try this again, for real this time". That's further discussion, just under a different name. I'd rather have an option that is honest with everyone and declares what will in effect happen. If you want an option that says "no, not now, not ever", you need to put it on the ballot. -- To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy -- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard
Bug#986382: DPL Jonathan Carter's passport number is ****909
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-proj...@lists.debian.org,debian-vote@lists.debian.org,debian-de...@lists.debian.org We are contributors to Debian The contribution of every one of us makes the name Debian respectable We can't allow a crazy woman who slept with a past project leader to hijack the name of the project and use it to scar volunteers. This happened to many times. It stops now. Please stop! Delete all fascism and defamation about any volunteer that has been instigated from Debian in any form whatsoever. Delete it from the vote, web pages, search engines. Please stop! Delete all negative options from the RMS vote. We only want positive options or nothing. We will not tolerate any outcome that is negative for a volunteer If the mob does not respect our request, we are making a data dump of all the DebConf personal data. DPL Jonathan Carter's passport number is 909. Privacy for everybody or privacy for nobody
Re: Printing from Linux (was: Re: Nuance Regarding RMS)
I certainly did not mean to disparage the efforts of the people working on the Debian printing software, who have really raised the bar. It's great that printers usually "just work", that they're automatically sniffed off the net, etc. Every time I print a page I remember the bad old days and am thankful for cups-browsed and all that. It seems fair to say that even in the Free Software community most people have resigned themselves to purchasing devices with proprietary firmware, that can be modified or even examined only with the cooperation of the manufacturers. They're all over: printers, dishwashers, cars, televisions, treadmills, smart microphones, mobile phones, smart bluetooth lightbulbs, implanted cardiac pacemakers, deep brain stimulation devices. As a community we try to work around it: get them to use standard protocols and interfaces. To be citizens of that world. But not RMS. He's not happy with that status quo. He's not okay with people having radio-controlled devices buried deep in their flesh, able to kill them with an errant pulse, their behavior ultimately controlled by others. I'm a practical man. My house is filled with devices whose software is either proprietary or, at best, Tivo-ized so it serves some other master. But RMS saw the growing dangers of this sort of situation, and I admire his vision in the matter, and his principles in fighting it tooth and nail, never giving a quarter, never yielding for the sake of convenience. This is not meant to minimize the enormous efforts many others, including you in particular, have put into getting things like software that interacts with broken proprietary printers (my sometimes-actually-prints but-always-happily-scans Dell B1165nfw, for instance) to work. Rather it's to say that we may be soldiers in this army: but RMS is the grizzled old sergeant, scarred and battleworn, unwilling to negotiate with the enemy, unwilling to strike a temporary bargain or sign a truce that compromises even a hair of a principle, spitting invective at the practical politicians and comfortable generals breaking bread with those who seek to control and subvert us, pure to the last drop. Sure, he smells bad, and has foul manners. He's terrible PR, a relic and an embarrassment. And printers still aren't free, and maybe we've made our peace with that. But he's going to keep fighting until they are anyway. --Barak.
Re: Debian-vote: GRs, discussion and voting periods - a plea for calm
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 05:36:21PM +, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > > > > Thanks > > (I agree with your mail. I'm just wondering.. about the following) > > - are you a member of the community team? > - was this an 'official' mail from the team or your personal opinion or a mix > or? > > IOW: I think it would have been / be good to make these things clear(er). > > Thanks! > Hi Holger, I _am_ a member of the community team. I did consult other members of the team before posting. This is, primarily, a personal view - designed, as I said, to stop numbers of complaints to -community and to calm discussion - I did consider whether to put this out as the view of the team as a whole but there were only half of us there - a personal plea for calm felt more in tune both with what I wanted to say and what was necessary immediately. Full clarification: I don't object to discussion at all under normal circumstances - but I couldn't stand to have another fortnight of traffic on debian-vote at the level of feeling that we have now or the number of emails we've had all over again :) > > -- > cheers, > Holger All the very best, Andy C. > > ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ > ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org > ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C > ⠈⠳⣄ > > A single bitcoin transaction alone consumes 621 KWh, or half a million times > more energy consumption than a credit card payment. The bitcoin network > annually > wastes 78 TWh (terrawatt hours) annually or the energy consumption of several > *million* US households. > https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1350869944888664064
Debian-vote: GRs, discussion and voting periods - a plea for calm
Everyone: There are currently two GRs (the DPL vote and the RMS statement) which have proved contentious and created large amounts of discussion, stifling some of the discussion we might normally have had. The vote period on both GRs has now started: please, everyone, stop posting mail to -vote trying to persuade people to one viewpoint or another. The discussion period has formally finished. We've had large numbers of mails to debian-vote. It is time to pause discussion. Can we please leave folks to make their choices as they think appropriate - however good or bad you may think those choices are, they are somebody else's choices to make in their own right - and go back to focusing on other Debian activities? The community team has had various emails: this mail is being sent by me, Andy Cater, to forestall further appeals to community if possible. Please also respect the integrity and independence of the Debian Project secretary and the mechanics of the voting, tallying and results process: this is the time to participate in voting and respect the integrity of Debian's normal processes. Thanks Andy Cater [amaca...@debian.org]
Printing from Linux (was: Re: Nuance Regarding RMS)
I'm well aware the discussion period is over, but I can't let that one pass, so bear with me. Le vendredi, 2 avril 2021, 18.19:02 h CEST Barak A. Pearlmutter a écrit : > Fifty years ago a laserprinter didn't work right because of some > software issue and he couldn't fix it because the software in that > car-sized prototype Xerox laserprinter was proprietary and it pissed > him off and he vowed that one day *nobody* will be in that position. > He's holding fast to that vow. He still works tirelessly, every day, > to bring us that vision. > > I've got a stupid Dell laserprinter 80cm from me and it doesn't work > right because of some stupid software issue and I can't fix it because > I don't have the source code. Nobody cares. Well, except RMS. He > cares. As Debian Printing Team member, when you state that "Nobody cares" (about printing from Linux systems), I don't receive it particularily well [0]. Not for our work specifically (we're "just" maintainers), but for the tireless work from upstreams who brought the ecosystem up to a point at which I'm not afraid to claim that Debian Bullseye will ship with the best (Linux) printing user experience _ever_. Of course, this is not due to the release of FLOSS printer firmware [1], but rather to standardization of network (and wire) protocols, lots of software architecturing and writing, as well as intense lobbying to reach a point where virtually all newly sold printers support open standards, that are now supported "driverless", directly from standard Debian installs [2]. (Debian's not unique in that regard, it's all free software). Although the initial trigger for the launch of the Free Sofware Foundation (and movement) might indeed have been a frustration with printers [3], from where I stand, I can reasonably state that OpenPrinting [4] _does_ care. Specifically, Till Kamppeter and Michael Sweet (among countless others) _do_ care. And their work has brought _immense_ progress for the specific question of "freedom to use printers in ways we see fit". I'm certainly not an expert on the history of these organizations, but it seems (to me) that we're at this point thanks to tireless efforts and industrial pragmatism from OpenPrinting (hence the Linux Foundation), the IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group, Apple [5] and certainly others; but not particularily thanks to the FSF (or RMS) (notwithstanding the FSF's contribution to the principles of Free Software, of course). RMS and the FSF certainly care for Free Software, but I'd refrain from using the "printers are bad proprietary machines, and printing from Linux sucks" example to illustrate that point: this particular problem was (mostly) solved by others; by turning this problem into "(recent) printers are bad proprietary machines that (mostly) follow open standards, hence printing from all OS' using (free) software implementing these standards is (mostly) flawless". -- OdyX [0] But I also took no offense, as I also read it as a hyperbole of sorts. [1] But in an era where most electronics from dishwashers to wireless routers to computer phones are essentially closed boxes of non-FLOSS software+firmware+hardware combinations, insisting for the release of FLOSS printer _firmware_ is not an effective way to reach our goals. [2] https://wiki.debian.org/DriverlessPrinting [3] https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201d-redux-a-testimonial-about-the-injustice-of-proprietary-firmware [4] Currently a free software organization under The Linux Foundation. [5] Yes, Apple acquired and then maintained CUPS under a FLOSS license for quite some time! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: New option for the RMS/FSF GR: reaffirm the values of the majority
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 06:09:53PM +0200, Milan Zamazal wrote: > > "MK" == Matthias Klumpp writes: > > MK> I did actually read this as satire and was quite amused by it > > I’m not amused by it. I liked the 1st April joke, but this is not fun > anymore and the fact that someone as respectful as Enrico does that > makes me thinking about some ballot options in a different light. > > I’d like to get rid of this matter and vote ASAP but considering > something important and related can happen in two weeks (e.g. the whole > FSF board may resign), is it possible to change a vote later during the > voting period? According to the constitution, 4.2.6, “The Secretary > determines for each poll whether voters can change their votes.” but I > can’t see this information in the ballot e-mail. The software always allows you to change your vote. Kurt
Re: New option for the RMS/FSF GR: reaffirm the values of the majority
> "MK" == Matthias Klumpp writes: MK> I did actually read this as satire and was quite amused by it I’m not amused by it. I liked the 1st April joke, but this is not fun anymore and the fact that someone as respectful as Enrico does that makes me thinking about some ballot options in a different light. I’d like to get rid of this matter and vote ASAP but considering something important and related can happen in two weeks (e.g. the whole FSF board may resign), is it possible to change a vote later during the voting period? According to the constitution, 4.2.6, “The Secretary determines for each poll whether voters can change their votes.” but I can’t see this information in the ballot e-mail. Regards, Milan
Re: Debian Project Leader election 2021: both candidates are from cancel mob
Le dimanche 04 avril 2021 à 21:33:57+1000, Dmitry Smirnov a écrit : > On Sunday, 4 April 2021 9:49:57 AM AEST Debian Project Secretary - Kurt > Roeckx wrote: > > [ ] Choice 1: Jonathan Carter > > [ ] Choice 2: Sruthi Chandran > > FYI, both cancel mob candidates signed anti-RMS statement: > > > https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md FYI, I mailed community@ about the despicable behaviour you are showing right now. While I'd never have done that during the discussion period, because I hold essential that one can express their opinion, the discussion periods are over, and the votes have started. Your mails are creating unacceptable pressure on other voters, and shows a poor respect for the democratic processes we have established. Votes are personal and never should be subject to any pressure. And to be clear, if any person voting against RMS were to do as you just did I'd mail community the same way and call out their behaviour the same way. Not only do you have to stop that, but I'd seriously reflect on myself if I were you. Don't even bother to reply, I'll ignore you until the end of both votes. -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: General Resolution: please vote responsibly
Le dimanche 04 avril 2021 à 21:27:28+1000, Dmitry Smirnov a écrit : > On Sunday, 4 April 2021 9:50:01 AM AEST Debian Project Secretary - Kurt > Roeckx wrote: > > This is the first call for votes on the General Resolution about > > a statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board. > > I urge everybody to vote responsibly and thoughtfully. Indeed. > Cancel mob can never be satisfied and, if encouraged, they will demand > more sacrifices soon. How could you consider that you are actually asking anyone to vote responsibly when you are trying to present them with the idea that voting options you dislike is not responsible? Your sense of democracy raises questions. -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian Project Leader election 2021: both candidates are from cancel mob
Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > > On Sunday, 4 April 2021 9:49:57 AM AEST Debian Project Secretary - Kurt > Roeckx wrote: >> [ ] Choice 1: Jonathan Carter >> [ ] Choice 2: Sruthi Chandran > > FYI, both cancel mob candidates signed anti-RMS statement: > > > https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md If you are unsatisfied with the DPL candidates available this time due to them co-signing the letter (or indeed, over half of all DPLs that project ever had[1]), then I hope you will "put your money where your mouth is" and run as a DPL candidate next round. Honestly, I think would be a much more constructive way of dealing with this issue than labelling people for "cancel mob candidates" in public because you disagree with them. ~Niels [1] The Debian project has had 17 unique DPLs according to Wikipedia. Of these, 10 of them co-signed the letter. Notably including 7 of the last 8 DPLs (spanning the period from 2008 to now except a two year period). Conveniently they have all added "Debian Project Leader" to their signature, which made them easy to find in the letter.
Re: opinion on Choice 1
On Tue, 2021-03-30 at 12:18 +0200, Ulrike Uhlig wrote: > > People without voting rights repeatedly tried to lobby or push for a > certain agenda on this list. Welcome to Debian. People are free to express their opinion, even if they are not owning an @debian.org email address. And that is actually a very good thing. The interested reader is able to filter messages and maybe maintain a list of people to ignore if needed. It might be annoying for you, but free speech is not always fun. -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
Re: General Resolution: please vote responsibly
On Sunday, 4 April 2021 9:31:26 PM AEST Jessica Clarke wrote: > they should vote for > what *they* believe in, not what you or anyone else thinks. Adults' vote would hardly be motivated by reverse psychology (e.g. voting against "what I think or anyone else think"). But it is worth remembering that to cancel someone's life mission is nothing less than an expressed death (non-existence) wish. -- Kind regards, Dmitry Smirnov GPG key : 4096R/52B6BBD953968D1B --- Writing non-free software is not an ethically legitimate activity, so if people who do this run into trouble, that's good! All businesses based on non-free software ought to fail, and the sooner the better. -- Richard Stallman signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: General Resolution: please vote responsibly
On Sun, 2021-04-04 at 12:31 +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 4 Apr 2021, at 12:27, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > > > > I urge everybody to vote responsibly and thoughtfully. > > > > Cancel mob can never be satisfied and, if encouraged, they will > > demand > > more sacrifices soon. > > The discussion period is over. Everyone should indeed vote > responsibly and > thoughtfully, which, being a democratic process, means they should > vote for > what *they* believe in, not what you or anyone else thinks. > > Jess > FSF board also followed some process but some people are trying to remove entire board now. If some other organiztions who use tools from Debian - demand similar things for Debian DDs who voted against them !
Re: General Resolution: please vote responsibly
On 4 Apr 2021, at 12:38, Pasha wrote: > On Sun, 2021-04-04 at 12:31 +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: >> On 4 Apr 2021, at 12:27, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: >>> >>> I urge everybody to vote responsibly and thoughtfully. >>> >>> Cancel mob can never be satisfied and, if encouraged, they will >>> demand >>> more sacrifices soon. >> >> The discussion period is over. Everyone should indeed vote >> responsibly and >> thoughtfully, which, being a democratic process, means they should >> vote for >> what *they* believe in, not what you or anyone else thinks. >> >> Jess >> > > FSF board also followed some process but some people are trying to > remove entire board now. > > If some other organiztions who use tools from Debian - demand similar > things for Debian DDs who voted against them ! I said the discussion period is over. Leave the developers to democratically express their views. Jess
Re: Debian Project Leader election 2021: both candidates are from cancel mob
On 4 Apr 2021, at 12:33, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > > On Sunday, 4 April 2021 9:49:57 AM AEST Debian Project Secretary - Kurt > Roeckx wrote: >> [ ] Choice 1: Jonathan Carter >> [ ] Choice 2: Sruthi Chandran > > FYI, both cancel mob candidates signed anti-RMS statement: > > > https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md The discussion period is over. If you don’t like either of the candidates, cast your vote for "Choice 3: None Of The Above". Stop trying to force your own views onto people like you just did for the GR. Jess
Re: Debian Project Leader election 2021: both candidates are from cancel mob
On Sunday, 4 April 2021 9:49:57 AM AEST Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx wrote: > [ ] Choice 1: Jonathan Carter > [ ] Choice 2: Sruthi Chandran FYI, both cancel mob candidates signed anti-RMS statement: https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md -- Cheers, Dmitry Smirnov GPG key : 4096R/52B6BBD953968D1B --- If I were a teacher, I would recommend that all my students very hurriedly read most of Orwell's books, especially 1984 and Animal Farm, because then they'd begin to understand the world we live in. -- John Pilger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: General Resolution: please vote responsibly
On 4 Apr 2021, at 12:27, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > > On Sunday, 4 April 2021 9:50:01 AM AEST Debian Project Secretary - Kurt > Roeckx wrote: >> This is the first call for votes on the General Resolution about >> a statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board. > > I urge everybody to vote responsibly and thoughtfully. > > Cancel mob can never be satisfied and, if encouraged, they will demand > more sacrifices soon. The discussion period is over. Everyone should indeed vote responsibly and thoughtfully, which, being a democratic process, means they should vote for what *they* believe in, not what you or anyone else thinks. Jess
Re: General Resolution: please vote responsibly
On Sunday, 4 April 2021 9:50:01 AM AEST Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx wrote: > This is the first call for votes on the General Resolution about > a statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board. I urge everybody to vote responsibly and thoughtfully. Cancel mob can never be satisfied and, if encouraged, they will demand more sacrifices soon. -- Cheers, Dmitry Smirnov GPG key : 4096R/52B6BBD953968D1B --- Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Mahatma Gandhi signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Cancel "culture" is a threat to Debian
On 2021/04/01 17:57, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote: > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:50:15PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: >> The first option is one option, the others are different and less >> strong. Having strong options in a GR doesn't turn the whole GR in a >> blackmail > > I would disagree. Especially, given that the first attempt to > "sign on behalf of the Debian" - was without a GR at all. That's simply not true. No one who has any authority whatsoever has attempted something like this. The first I've seen of any formal move to make an official contribution to that document on behalf of Debian was in that GR. -Jonathan
Re: Constitution A.6 - "V(A,D) is strictly great"
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 09:31:46AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > Hi, > > In https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution#item-A, there is the > following sentence under A.6. bullet 3.2.: > > > An option A defeats the default option D by a majority ratio N, if V(A,D) > > is greater or equal to N * V(D,A) and V(A,D) is strictly great > > The "... and V(A,D) is strictly great" looks like an incomplete > sentence. Is that something we can fix as an editorial correction (i.e. > without a vote)? See #896067. Kurt
Constitution A.6 - "V(A,D) is strictly great"
Hi, In https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution#item-A, there is the following sentence under A.6. bullet 3.2.: > An option A defeats the default option D by a majority ratio N, if V(A,D) is > greater or equal to N * V(D,A) and V(A,D) is strictly great The "... and V(A,D) is strictly great" looks like an incomplete sentence. Is that something we can fix as an editorial correction (i.e. without a vote)? ~Niels
Re: New option for the RMS/FSF GR: reaffirm the values of the majority
On 2021/04/04 05:47, Matthias Klumpp wrote: > I did actually read this as satire and was quite amused by it - I > didn't think it could have been read as a serious request until the > first response to it. I would appreciate it if we could keep satire and comedy a bit dialed back for a but. As much as I appreciate satire and comedy, there is a place and time for it, for example, you wouldn't practice your stand-up routine at a funeral for a loved one. Also, there are classes of humor that's really just not appropriate, and on top of all that, many of is in the project are suffering from huge information overload. That is, we have a backlog of information that needs to be processed, some which will also affect the choices of both votes currently running. Adding more noise that is difficult to filter and interpret is something that I consider somewhere on a spectrum of insensitive to reckless. So, I'm please asking again that posters to the list attempt to be more mindful of what they consider to be humor to the list and the effects it may have on others before doing so. -Jonathan
Re: New option for the RMS/FSF GR: reaffirm the values of the majority
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 11:51:29PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > It seems highly likely that the message to which I'm replying was not > sent or authorized by Enrico, and that its sender is trying to mislead > Debian members by impersonating a prominent and respected developer. I can confirm it was not an impersonation attempt. My previous subkeys are due to expire on 2021-06-03 and I've recently generated new ones. They should be properly signed by my master key and I have uploaded them to keyserver.ubuntu.com and keyring.debian.org Using GPG became more complicated recently with the keyserver network collapsing, and on a different venue I'd welcome a serious reassessment of our technical practices of certifying trust :( My proposal was a honest attempt at encoding in a straightforward proposal the gist that I was perceiving from what seemed to me like the majority of posts on -vote. I was honestly interested to see if that represented the feelings of our community at large. If those are indeed the feelings of the majority of a community I'm part of, it is extremely important for me to know. Even so, my proposal, although serious, was motivated mainly by frustration, disappointment, and disgust. Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini signature.asc Description: PGP signature
