Re: 34C3

[Carsten Agger]

On 01/12/2018 10:25 AM, Werner Koch wrote:


The background seems to be a discussion on the German list (and maybe on
some Berlin meetings) on whether it is acceptable that the FSFE takes
donations from Google.  In the aftermath of this one Berlin based member
canceled their membership which triggered a discussion on the members
only list.

I have not seen these handouts but I assume the text was in line with
his arguments expressed over several weeks on the German lists.  Erik's
reaction to ban him from *behind* the booth is fully acceptable to me
and I would have done the same.  Diverting opinions are for sure welcome
but they should not be presented in a way which let bystanders assume
that this (self-)critique is an official position of the FSFE.



A somewhat late comment on this issue, ie the issue behind the issue.

I agree in the handling of the situation by Erik, i.e. not accepting 
someone serving in a public-facing booth while simultaneously agitating 
against a decision taken by the organisation - if you're manning a booth 
at a public event for an organisation, presumably you're there to 
represent that organisation, not to undermine it.


Regarding whether the FSFE should accept donations from Google, though 
... I find the question tricky.


FSFE is an organisation which works for software freedom. As a sister 
organisation of the FSF, it considers proprietary software to be 
unethical, and the ultimate goal of the free software movement is that 
*all* software supplied to the public should be free software.


Google is, with almost no caveat at all, in its practices and apparent 
goals, an *enemy* of software freedom. It's one of the world's leading 
providers of proprietary software in the form of proprietary JavaScript 
applications - GMail, Google Docs, Google Calendar, etc. Google is not 
opposed to software patents, on the contrary it actively pursues them 
and will use them to keep their competition out. Google has used its 
patented technologies, especially its ubiquitous JavaScript, to spy on 
millions of people, going as far as tracking their every movement and 
recording and parsing their everyday conversations in order to target 
them for ads. That's *exactly* the kind of abusive practices that make 
software freedom so necessary. When asked about these surveillance 
practices, they are traditionally *very* secretive.


Google intercepts a huge fraction of all the world's email, and if the 
patents it has filed is any guideline, it will scan these emails for 
reference to persons and map them out, connected to as much information 
they can get about these persons, including their addresss, phone 
number, etc., regardless of whether these persons use their services or 
not. Of course, their ultimate goal is that everybody should be a user 
of their services, which would place a complete track of everything 
everybody is doing in their possession. This account may be slightly 
hyperbolic, but there's no mistaking their goals. Note that such 
information can be made available to law enforcement, and according to 
the Snowden leaks, such information, gathered by Google's proprietary 
software, has also been surreptitiously handed over to intelligence 
agencies.


Google may be an important contributor to various free software 
projects, but that's hardly any excuse for such abuses. I'd argue that 
Google's contributions to free software have nothing to do with a 
support for the philosophy behind it but is a pure cost/benefit analysis 
aimed at securing community support as well as infrastructure.


All this being so, the wisdom of accepting money from Google is indeed 
very debatable. I do realize that the wisdom of rejecting donations is 
also very debatable, so this is not to second-guess the decision that 
was taken. Only to raise the question; Google *is* an adversary that 
ideally we'd like to see forced to give up its patents and deploy free 
software only, or go down.


What is the best way to walk that line?

Best
Carsten
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct

Re: 34C3

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

I want to make clear that I know no prooof that FSF is favoring
Google by promoting Google's non-free software.

Please if you know some, point it out.

2018-01-12T09:13:51-0200 Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> Yet again we see this confusion... FSF also receives donations from
> Google. I don't know about the organizational status of FSFE, but in the
> case of FSF: it's *impossible* for a 501(c)(3) charity organization like
> the FSF to continue working if they ever decide to favor every action or
> product of a specific person/organization even in cases where such
> aren't in favor with their goals. In contrast, donations from
> for-profits are what makes most of the income for most organizations (I
> don't know about the FSF, but I think that in their "About" pages you
> can see references about such subjects).
>
> My suggestion: investigate the status of FSFE and the detailed
> requirements *both* for organizations that act as donors and for the
> receiving organization.
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: 34C3

[Joe Awni]

I'm quite curious about the controversial printout/pamphlet that sparked this 
controversy. Is anyone able to upload a photocopy? 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 12 Jan 2018, at 12:13, Adonay Felipe Nogueira  
> wrote:
> 
> Yet again we see this confusion... FSF also receives donations from
> Google. I don't know about the organizational status of FSFE, but in the
> case of FSF: it's *impossible* for a 501(c)(3) charity organization like
> the FSF to continue working if they ever decide to favor every action or
> product of a specific person/organization even in cases where such
> aren't in favor with their goals. In contrast, donations from
> for-profits are what makes most of the income for most organizations (I
> don't know about the FSF, but I think that in their "About" pages you
> can see references about such subjects).
> 
> My suggestion: investigate the status of FSFE and the detailed
> requirements *both* for organizations that act as donors and for the
> receiving organization.
> 
> 2018-01-12T10:25:16+0100 Werner Koch wrote:
>> majestyx wrote:
>> 
>>  Am dritten Tag folgte dann leider ein sehr einschneidendes
>>  Erlebnis. Der FSFE Mitarbeiter (mit Endgegner Shirt) wollte mir den
>>  Zugang zum FSFE Stand verwehren mit der Aussage ich würde quasi über
>>  den FSFE Tisch hinweg Negativ-Werbung machen. Ich fragte ihn nach dem
>>  Beweis, den blieb er schuldig und versteifte sich darauf bei seiner
>>  Behauptung zu bleiben, um mich dann des FSFE Standes zu verweisen.
>> 
>> Content: A FSFE staffer rejected him access to the FSFE booth where he
>> used to help out as a volunteer.  The given reason was that majestyx was
>> engaged in negative advertising on the FSFE from behind the booth.  He
>> asked for evidence but the FSFE staffer was not able to present it.
>> 
>> That FSFE staffer (Erik) explained on the members only list:
>> 
>>  one of our supporters was acting like a wolf in sheep's
>>  clothing. While he was on one hand behind the booth to sell
>>  merchandise, he on the other hand spread self-made print-outs about
>>  "#fuckgooglefsfe" to criticise that FSFE accepts donations by
>>  google. (the print-outs were fortunately so bad and cryptic I doubt
>>  someone could understand what they are saying)
>> 
>>  Despite him insisting on his freedom of opinion, I forbid that person
>>  to spread these print-outs around the booth.
>> 
>> The background seems to be a discussion on the German list (and maybe on
>> some Berlin meetings) on whether it is acceptable that the FSFE takes
>> donations from Google.  In the aftermath of this one Berlin based member
>> canceled their membership which triggered a discussion on the members
>> only list.
>> 
>> I have not seen these handouts but I assume the text was in line with
>> his arguments expressed over several weeks on the German lists.  Erik's
>> reaction to ban him from *behind* the booth is fully acceptable to me
>> and I would have done the same.  Diverting opinions are for sure welcome
>> but they should not be presented in a way which let bystanders assume
>> that this (self-)critique is an official position of the FSFE.
>> 
>> 
>> Shalom-Salam,
>> 
>>   Werner
> ___
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
> https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: 34C3

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

Yet again we see this confusion... FSF also receives donations from
Google. I don't know about the organizational status of FSFE, but in the
case of FSF: it's *impossible* for a 501(c)(3) charity organization like
the FSF to continue working if they ever decide to favor every action or
product of a specific person/organization even in cases where such
aren't in favor with their goals. In contrast, donations from
for-profits are what makes most of the income for most organizations (I
don't know about the FSF, but I think that in their "About" pages you
can see references about such subjects).

My suggestion: investigate the status of FSFE and the detailed
requirements *both* for organizations that act as donors and for the
receiving organization.

2018-01-12T10:25:16+0100 Werner Koch wrote:
> majestyx wrote:
>
>   Am dritten Tag folgte dann leider ein sehr einschneidendes
>   Erlebnis. Der FSFE Mitarbeiter (mit Endgegner Shirt) wollte mir den
>   Zugang zum FSFE Stand verwehren mit der Aussage ich würde quasi über
>   den FSFE Tisch hinweg Negativ-Werbung machen. Ich fragte ihn nach dem
>   Beweis, den blieb er schuldig und versteifte sich darauf bei seiner
>   Behauptung zu bleiben, um mich dann des FSFE Standes zu verweisen.
>
> Content: A FSFE staffer rejected him access to the FSFE booth where he
> used to help out as a volunteer.  The given reason was that majestyx was
> engaged in negative advertising on the FSFE from behind the booth.  He
> asked for evidence but the FSFE staffer was not able to present it.
>
> That FSFE staffer (Erik) explained on the members only list:
>
>   one of our supporters was acting like a wolf in sheep's
>   clothing. While he was on one hand behind the booth to sell
>   merchandise, he on the other hand spread self-made print-outs about
>   "#fuckgooglefsfe" to criticise that FSFE accepts donations by
>   google. (the print-outs were fortunately so bad and cryptic I doubt
>   someone could understand what they are saying)
>   
>   Despite him insisting on his freedom of opinion, I forbid that person
>   to spread these print-outs around the booth.
>
> The background seems to be a discussion on the German list (and maybe on
> some Berlin meetings) on whether it is acceptable that the FSFE takes
> donations from Google.  In the aftermath of this one Berlin based member
> canceled their membership which triggered a discussion on the members
> only list.
>
> I have not seen these handouts but I assume the text was in line with
> his arguments expressed over several weeks on the German lists.  Erik's
> reaction to ban him from *behind* the booth is fully acceptable to me
> and I would have done the same.  Diverting opinions are for sure welcome
> but they should not be presented in a way which let bystanders assume
> that this (self-)critique is an official position of the FSFE.
>
>
> Shalom-Salam,
>
>Werner
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: 34C3

[Heiki Lõhmus]

Dear all,

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 08:03:20AM -0500, Cornelia S. wrote:
> With all talk of a code of conduct, this ist the result:
> 
> https://blogs.fsfe.org/majestyx/2018/01/07/sold-out-majestyx-goes-to-chaos/#more-335
> 
> It is shameful, this coming from the FSFE.

The behaviour of some volunteers at the CCC and the event coordinator's
response is under review by the CARE team. The event coordinator has
recused themself from the case. Everyone with first-hand experience of
the matter is welcome to e-mail their recollection of the events and any
concerns they may have to care at fsfe dot org.


Yours,
-- 
Heiki Lõhmus
Vice President
Free Software Foundation Europe
mailto:repenti...@fsfe.org
xmpp:repenti...@fsfe.org


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: 34C3

[bruno]

"Cornelia S."  ha scritto:


With all talk of a code of conduct, this ist the result:

https://blogs.fsfe.org/majestyx/2018/01/07/sold-out-majestyx-goes-to-chaos/#more-335

It is shameful, this coming from the FSFE.


Google translate doesn't do a great de->en translation, and english is  
not my first language. The only "shameful" event I was able to make  
out is that according to majestyx an FSFE employee and staff member  
with a "boss" t-shirt wanted to deny access to the FSFE booth to  
majestyx.


--
https://twrh.noblogs.org ~ printf "%X\n" 44203
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Re: 34C3

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

Sorry I can't comment on anything because I lack context and
understanding of the language used.

2018-01-11T08:03:20-0500 Cornelia S. wrote:
> With all talk of a code of conduct, this ist the result:
>
> https://blogs.fsfe.org/majestyx/2018/01/07/sold-out-majestyx-goes-to-chaos/#more-335
>
>
> It is shameful, this coming from the FSFE.
>
> Regards,
> Cornelia

-- 
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
  gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
  instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
  Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
  GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
  (apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

34C3

[Cornelia S.]

With all talk of a code of conduct, this ist the result:

https://blogs.fsfe.org/majestyx/2018/01/07/sold-out-majestyx-goes-to-chaos/#more-335

It is shameful, this coming from the FSFE.

Regards,
Cornelia___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Call for sessions at the FSFE assembly at 34C3

[Erik Albers]

Dear list,

For those of you who go to the 34C3 but did not yet receive the news: the FSFE
assembly is once again running a call for participation:

  https://fsfe.org/news/2017/news-20171024-01.en.html

This time we will share a stage together with EDRi, EFF, Privacy Internatioanl
etc and I would be very pleased to see a lot of FSFE supporters on stage or
topics around Free Software being discussed respectively.

Attention: Deadline is already this Sunday.

If you have any questions, you can ask me directly.

Best,
   Erik

-- 
No one shall ever be forced to use non-free software
Erik Albers | Communication & Community Coordinator | FSFE
OpenPGP Key-ID: 0x8639DC81 on keys.gnupg.net
___
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion