the questions you really want FSFE to answer
daniel at pocock.pro
Thu Jun 14 22:25:03 UTC 2018
On 15/06/18 00:13, Carmen Bianca Bakker wrote:
> Dear Daniel,
> On ĵaŭ, 2018-06-14 at 22:37 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> This statement could create the impression that Daniel Pocock was the
>>> one vote against the simplification of the membership procedure.
>>> However, this is not the case. Daniel Pocock did not participate in this
>>> vote, nor did he participate in the General Assembly altogether (neither
>>> personally nor by delegation).
>> Some people may have chosen not to attend the meeting so that it
>> wouldn't achieve quorum.
> That sounds unusually anti-democratic. A staunch democrat votes.
>> In my case, I actually went out to Albania and Kosovo for free software
>> events while other FSFE GA members and staff were meeting in Berlin
>> to remove my position.
> This sounds more than a little disingenuous. It sounds like you are
> implying that the GA scarcely go to free software events and/or only
> had a meeting to vote on a single matter. Both couldn't be further
> from the truth.
The meeting minutes show that it only considered a single matter.
> I am certain that there is a better platform or way to address these
> disagreements than what looks like airing dirty laundry in public,
> though. The CoC mandates that criticism be constructive, and claims
> like this...
>> As the last man standing for democracy in FSFE
> ...don't look the part.
> I assume you have good intentions, Daniel, and love free software every
> bit as much as the rest of us, so I want to ask you if your issues can
> be addressed with the same assumption of good intentions.
As a representative, I also have to be honest with people
There are currently no other elected representatives of the community in
the General Assembly
While some people don't care about elections or proper membership, other
people do care about it so much that they stopped contributing and that
is a loss for everybody.
The constructive thing to do is get more people involved in the
discussion about what comes next rather than using a reference to the
CoC to censor how people discuss it.
More information about the Discussion