FSFE Finance

Nick Hockings s96121272 at op.up.ac.za
Tue Jul 24 17:16:08 UTC 2001

> Anders Lindback wrote:
> > Independence and focusing on long term goals are more a state of mind
> > and has nothing to do with how many members the organisation has.
>Reinhard Mueller <reinhard.mueller at bytewise.at>: 
> Sorry, but it has. Please look at the mailing list archives of this
> list and consider everybody posting a message was a member of the FSFE who
> had to take part in the decision making process. I don't think any decision
> would have been made till now.

As one of those taking part in this list, 
I strongly agree with the current FSFE system.

Compulsory fees would change the focus and nature of the organization.
FS is not about money, it is about principle.
You don't have to pay to join a Church (cults excluded)
You join because you share its principles.

FSFE is not a union or a political party that seeks power for its members.
We promote the principles of freesoftware, for the good of all people.
We are a phillanthropic organization, and contributions to our cause
come in many forms:

#writing and sharing good free software is the most important.
#advocacy both privately and publicly is important.
#financial donnations to the FSF or FSFE helps other people to do the above.

But you can't trade these contributions. You can't say one person has done 
enough, and another has not. There is no limit (except exhaustion) to how much 
somebody might do for our cause.

An appeal to our list subscribers for funding may be worth considering, 
contributions by completing tasks on the task list are better.
There is an important advantage to the way FSFE and FSF work:
it makes us incorruptible.

Nick Hockings 
(hopefully my mail server has stopped calling me "OP Mail Subscriber")

More information about the Discussion mailing list