Re: list moderation

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Brandon,

Brandon Invergo <brandon@gnu.org> skribis:

> Andy Wingo writes:
>
>>> Who is “we” in “we have decided” above?
>>
>> I don't think this question has been answered.  Brandon, could you
>> clarify please?
>
>>> Can you explain how “moderation was being used in a biased manner”,
>>> giving specific examples?
>>
>> I am also interested in answers to this question.
>
> I do not intend to discuss internal GNU matters on a public mailing
> list.

Wait, the topic is precisely moderation of this public mailing list; I
think you can’t simply avoid the question, you’re accountable.

> I'm sorry you have interpreted it that way.  I have been working
> tirelessly to keep peace since you created this mess a few weeks ago.
> Please keep in mind that "something was broken" for me the moment all of
> you took up arms against GNU.

I feel bad that you’re characterizing us this way.  You’re talking about
people who’ve dedicated many years or their lives to GNU (more than you
did!) and still pour huge amounts of energy into it.

That you disagree with what we do is fine; that you accuse us of
attacking GNU is not.  It’s not even plausible to anyone who’s been
following along.  We all *are* GNU.

As for the disagreement itself: it’s also a surprise to me.  We met on a
couple of GHMs.  In particular, in 2011 in Paris, we had discussions
about governance not unlike those we’re having now; at the time I recall
you were part of the discussions and not seeing anyone “taking arms.”

It’s OK if you view things differently now, but I would prefer if you
would use more nuanced wording when describing the actions of others.
We have different views, but we’re working for the betterment of GNU.

Thanks,
Ludo’.