On Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:42:46AM +0200, Josef Dalcolmo wrote:
I do have a problem with the current closed constitution of the FSFE.
This is not a democratic system, but a system set up by a few self-nominated individuals.
This has been addressed before. The system itself is democratic. RMS approved people.
there exists no political mandate.
The aim of the FSFE is not to obtain a political mandate in the way you describe it. We do not want to represent the Free Software Movement in total numbers.
I fear that many others, who would be supportive of the Free Software movement, hold back, because they do not really feel represented.
If our actions do not represent you, please tell us. Listen to a large group of people is not much easier when they are official members of an organisation. We want to listen.
Why is it then however, that anyone can become a member of the FSF (in the USA)?
This is news to me. AFAIK only the necessary number of people is actually a member of the FSF.
how are you going to be respected by the democratically elected members of the governments you are talking to?
Our arguments will have to stand on their own.
Bernhard