On the structure of the FSF Europe

[MJ Ray]

"Georg C. F. Greve" <greve at gnu.org> writes:

> Although I don't know where this misinformation came from, some people
> seem to think the FSF Europe was non-democratic.

Now why would that be?  Let's look at the evidence...

> It is our fault that the constitutions aren't online yet [...]

> The initial core team were people chosen in agreement with RMS [...]

> Now new members are appointed by 3/4 election of the existing members
> only. [...]

> Members of the associate organizations can enter the
> <country>@fsfeurope.org mailing lists where we discuss the more
> confidential things that should not be made entirely public at the
> time.

While this may technically be a democracy, it doesn't feel like that
to the people who wish to participate.  If I've read this properly,
the constituency is the existing executive.  That sounds seriously
broken.

Also, members without a national associate organisation (nb spelling)
are unable to participate fully.  This "two-speed" system is divisive.

-- 
MJR