[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Proposals to improve FSF (was a thread about FSF union)
From: |
Danny Spitzberg |
Subject: |
Proposals to improve FSF (was a thread about FSF union) |
Date: |
Wed, 31 Mar 2021 10:25:47 -0700 |
Jean, what was your proposal to improve FSF? Aaron Paul Deb and I
believe a few others have had their ideas come through via this list.
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 10:03 AM Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
* Danny Spitzberg <[1]stationaery@gmail.com> [2021-03-31 19:25]:
> Below, history of the FSF union and how it was intentionally
created to
> overcome bad behavior and poor leadership from RMS (he didn’t
believe
> in time of to mourn dead family members?!). A healthy and
sustainable
> FSF is important for the free/libre software movement. And...
It’s
> healthy to have constructive criticism. It shows trust and
interest.
> FSF Can become better. And from this narrative, it sounds like
several
> staff and board members struggled to make that happen, instead
of
> simply denying grievances.
FSF is private nonprofit foundation, not public. Thus it works by
its
legal statutes, not by public decisions. Though management
listens. But they are not bound by anything from outside but law..
It
is not democratic, and not necessarily transparent. Financial
reports
are transparent by the law, what is happening inside and internally
is
their own business.
Matters are straight that way.
Me or you, as not being on board, not having any votes, we can
discuss
all day long, it is not in our authority, and it is useless
discussion
that will not convert even one computer to free software.
> “RMS created non-safe spaces at both MIT & the FSF. When I was
at the
> FSF, RMS had little to no empathy for the staff. The FSF was
not a
> healthy, functional workplace. We formed a union to help
protect
> ourselves from RMS — he controlled our pay, benefits, and
workplace
> conditions.
It is very interesting, that my proposal on how to improve the FSF
was
rejected by moderator, but this type of yet another bullying passes
through.
How about moderator to tell us on the list, why is this allowed, and
my writing not allowed?
Why you not tell to this person "to take it up with FSF" like how
you
told to me "to take it up with FSF"?
Moderator should not be there just to delete and block some of
emails
and pass the others, that is unfair, as you are moderating it
politically, thus passing other emails related to FSF.
___ _ _ __ _______ _____ _
/ _ \ _ __ ___ | |__ (_) __ _ \ \ / /_ _| ___| |
| | | | '_ \ / _ \ | '_ \| |/ _` | \ \ /\ / / | | | |_ | |
| |_| | | | | __/ | |_) | | (_| | \ V V / | | | _| |_|
\___/|_| |_|\___| |_.__/|_|\__, | \_/\_/ |_| |_| (_)
|___/
Jean
References
1. mailto:stationaery@gmail.com
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Proposals to improve FSF (was a thread about FSF union),
Danny Spitzberg <=