[Fsfe-se] Jabber official meeting

[Jeremiah Foster]

On Aug 22, 2007, at 5:15 PM, Henrik Sandklef wrote:

> Jeremiah Foster wrote:
>> On Aug 22, 2007, at 4:05 PM, Henrik Sandklef wrote:
>> Is this an alias for fsfe-se at fsfeurope.org or a separate email list?
>
> http://www.sweden.fsfeurope.org/contact/contact.en.html
>
>> I participate in those projects that are open and advance human
>> rights. I believe debian is one of those projects, that is why I am
>> on the perl-packaging team.
>
> Can anyone without a proven skill get inside Debian?

No.

> Can Mr Waters, who
> has no programming skills and knows nothing about licensing or
> computers, become a Debian core member?

Well, if Mr. Waters has done a lot for debian, yes. Maybe he has  
written documentation or provided infrastructure, or represented  
debian in the press or at conferences, or even organized a debian  
conference. But it is unlikely that someone like that would get  
involved in the first place, which I think is your point.

>> I will continue to participate with the
>> FSFE but I have never seen a Fellow of the FSFE at any FSFE meeting
>> (side from yourself) and Jonas.
>
> I have.
>
> How do you tell a fellow from a non-fellow?
>
> Do you really want us to make difference between fellows and non- 
> fellows
> during the meetings?

I cannot tell the difference between a fellow and a non-fellow at the  
meetings, or anywhere else. The meetings have always been open to  
all. I want them to remain that way, including Jabber.

>> Keeping the meetings open for all
>> will allow for;
>>
>> 	1. A larger community
>> 	2. Greater openness
>
> Again, all (100%) meetings have been public.

But now they will just be for fellows, at least on Jabber. Why this  
change in policy?
>
>> Actually debian is quite different. Debian has a gigantic set of
>> policy documents which get voted on _before_ they come into effect.
>> FSFE does not have this. Debian removes it leadership and elects a
>> new leader every year. FSFE does not do this.
>
> We elected president this year.
>
I stand corrected.

>> Debian is free as in
>> beer to use and join.
>
> OK, I didn't know that. I thought it was hard to get in and do for
> example work on their softwares
>
Yes of course, but still, if you have the competency, you get in  
without having to pay money.

>> FSFE is free as in freedom, not free as in
>> beer. Money blocks those who do not have the means from joining,
>
> Fellowship is 'blocked' by 60 euros. FSFE is free.

But it is the fellowship that gets the special perks, the meetings on  
Jabber for example. So you cannot get 'real' membership in the FSFE  
without paying.

>
> There are other ways of influencing FSFE. Emails are one them.  
> Attending
> meetings another. Helping out with work yet another. Sponsorship even
> yet another.

I have done all of those things, yet cannot participate in the Jabber  
meeting.

>> therefor FSFE is not open to everyone, just those who can afford it.
>
> No, the fellowship costs 60 euros.
>
> FSFE is free to join, given that the person have the skills needed.
>
> FSFE is not closed to everyone who can't afford. We have numerous
> volunteers who do lots of work.
>
>> Debian is completely transparent - every process, every package,
>> every decision gets made in public with a great deal of debate. That
>> is why debian's founder calls it "process run amok." But that process
>> is democratic.
>
>
>> Where is the debate in the FSFE?
>> Where are the voices
>> for and against?
>
> For and against what?

Hard to say really, I was trying to be hypothetical. I have a hard  
time coming up with a concrete answer.

> Discussions are made here: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/ 
> discussion/
>
>> Where are the emails to the mailing list?
>
> I don't follow! Can you try again.
>
>>> The steps above prevents take-overs better.
>>
>> Maybe, maybe not. Transparency can work as a brake on the aspirations
>> of a FSFE board that makes decisions that the Fellows do not approve
>> of, someone can take over the FSFE from the inside as well. In fact,
>> I would make the argument that the FSFE is just a branch of the FSF
>> and takes its marching orders from Boston.
>
> Those are strong words. You are, of course, free to make that  
> argument.

I agree, they are strong words, but this is the appearance from the  
outside.

Lets face it, Richard Stallman has a strong personality - I would  
argue that you would have to have a strong personality to do what he  
does. But there are other voices in the Free Software world, Linus  
Torvalds for example, and perhaps the FSFE might act as a counter  
weight to some of the more extreme, and damaging, opinions and  
policies from Mr. Stallman.

> All the FSFs out there (Latin America, India, North America,  
> Europe) are
> different organisations that, of course, synchronise every now and  
> then.
> We all share the same goals.

But different how? Where are the concrete differences? Can the FSFE  
make a decision that contradicts the FSF? What if the FSFE hired Eben  
Moglen for example?

>
> have to leave now, i'll be back

I look forward to it!

    Jeremiah