improving the tone of discussion in FSFE

Bernhard E. Reiter bernhard at
Wed Sep 12 07:19:32 UTC 2018

Buongiorno Stefan,

Am Dienstag 11 September 2018 21:36:49 schrieb Stefan Uygur:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 8:08 PM Bernhard E. Reiter <bernhard at>

> Exactly Bernhard, for your point of view. As from my point of view putting
> someone's name in the subject indicates nothing but an
> instigation/provocation or calling for war.

then I hereby apologise to Daniel and those who interpreted it this way!
As it was not meant to be provocative. (My aim was to be clear as respect 
towards all readers, this is why I am changing the subject often if I believe 
the main topic has shifted.)

> > It is not unrespectful in my eyes. Instead it shows what others cannot
> > understand the difference between the missed opportunities and your
> > public demands.
> Who are the others Bernhard?

On this particular point a number of people on this public mailinglist that 
have responded to Daniel's mails. For example Harald Welte (on the 30th), 
Nikos Roussos (on the 30th), Torsten Grote (on the 1st), Florian Snow (on the 
5th), Carsten Agger (on the 3rd), Reinhard Müller (on the 29th), Max Mehl (on 
the 29th), Michael Kesper (on the 28th), Christian Kalkhoff (on the 29th).

> Can they speak on their behalf if you don't mind me asking pls?

Many of them already did, see my incomplete list above.
Also I do not speak "for them", which I cannot. What I am trying to do
is to summarize my observations.

Given that there has been offensive language against individuals on this
list and that some points haven raised before, I can understand that many do
not feel comfortable exposing themselfs. I am respecting their choice.

> So let me ask you this question again. Given the incompatibility what are
> the amendments and actions that FSFE staff is prepared to take from
> practical point of view?

To clarify: I do not speak for the staff nor 
for the executive leadership of FSFE.

If you ask me what to do, I hope we can 
 a) establish a constructive tone and atmosphere
 b) listen and ask back to understand what issues there are
    in the Free Software communities and
 c) propose an adapted course for FSFE and sail it 

b) and c) is a regular activity of FSFE staff, executive leadership
and volunteers. It may or may not turn out issues are bigger this time. 
(However in 17 years of FSFE there had been a lot of larger controversies.)

> And just FYI, I am not referring to Daniel only when I talk about
> incompatibility, there are lots of people/supporters who things the same
> way, therefore incompatible and they will come out soon....

The incompatibility I was refering to is one of working styles between Daniel 
and many e.V. members, other volunteers and community members. It is not 
about criticism of FSFE's structure. It is about how FSFE shall discuss 
topics, forms an opinion and works together. Somehow working with Daniel 
turned out to be non-constructive and after trying to moderate and clarify 
missunderstandings in this case I meanwhile unfortunately see no other choice 
as to end the working relationship with him. I believe this is for the better 
of everyone.

I am quite sure that many people and supporters holding similiar opinions
are able to voice themselfs differently and I am looking forward working with 
all of you!

Best Regards,

FSFE -- Founding Member     Support our work for Free Software: | contribute
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the Discussion mailing list