Re: Should we take steps to reduce russian access to Free Software?> the headache of it all dissolves in forgiveness

[Jean Louis]

* Valentino Giudice <valentino.giudice96@gmail.com> [2022-03-02 09:19]:
> > when Devin answers with: " 'what' the FSF ... ", that 'what' makes me
> > think that there is something going on
> 
> Stop right there.
> Devin is only responsible for what he writes, not for what you
> think.

It is not simple like that Valentino. Devin has signed his email as
being the FSF community outreach officer. And he did make references
to FSF directly. 

If Devin would be talking like you, it would be clear that Valentino
is not FSF officer or community outreach -- so it becomes clear that
statement is not FSF statement.

I am however sure that Devin understood the presentation and that he
knows how to speak for himself and how to speak in front of or in the
name of organization.

If I am FSF officer, then I can send email from my private email
address and in capacity as myself; or I can make clear I speak my
opinion, and not represent FSF.

So that is from where little confusion came, nothing really
significant. 

> > but then, is there the same amount of active engagemant on all the
> > other issues? and that is no trivial question, for there might be
> > monsanto using free software for spraying prohibited neonicotins,
> 
> Which is something the FSF doesn't legally have to care about.
> But because there are US sanctions against Russia, the FSF, and any
> other US organization, has to comply.

Yes please, though also it would be kind not to generalize. FSF
complies to what specifically? To comply to what? As not to accept
Putin as FSF member and his politicans? Like what exactly.

Let us not generalize, sanctions by US are specific, government did so
much care to make it specific, they have named individual people who
are sanctioned.

Is post office and mailing of items to Russia sanctioned? I am sure it
is difficult, but is it sanctioned?

Is the person Russian Mr. ABC sanctioned?

If not, FSF can ship whatever items. Including FSF can receive
donations from Russians, that is not sanctioned.

Don't mix everything with everything. 

Russian people are too many, don't accuse and blame all of the nation
for politics. And that politics was anyway caused by US, so first go
from where it was caused. 

Reference:

US Congress stops funding for Ukraine's war-criminal, neo-Nazi Azov Battalion 
-- Puppet Masters -- Sott.net
https://www.sott.net/article/350064-US-Congress-stops-funding-for-Ukraines-war-criminal-neo-Nazi-Azov-Battalion

> >... and then we come to the problem of arbitrirary choosing as best as
> >  we can, out of zillion unjustices, which ones we will fight against.
> 
> But the FSF is not fighting against this injustice. In fact, the FSF
> is not even claiming the ongoing situation is an injustice.
> The FSF is just "chosing" anything, it's just doing what it has to as
> a US organization.

That is correct, FSF should abide to its articles of incorporation,
goals and purposes, and straighten freedom of software. 

FSF has already pointed out to injustices like privacy and
communication, I guess also censorship. It is related to free software
as such may provide privacy, straight communication without
surveillance and avoid censorship. 

In those areas it would be right to say that human rights abuses are
occuring now in many countries which are blocking all of the Russian
media, and Russia blocking other media and giving back in same way and
conducting censorhip. We cannot even get the viewpoint from other side
to decide for ourselves. That is called mass hypnosis, as invented by
Goebels, Hitler's propagandist. 

> The US government. Do you think the FSF decided these sanctions?

Apropos, FSF could be incorporated in other countries where such
sanctions do not exist and it could have independent groups of people
who act on their own and who are not under any sanctions.

For example, somebody could make FSF-like organization in Iran or in
Russia, and promote free software. It is needed there too.

> > > so i wonder what would this selective active engagement in our case
> > mean.
> 
> It means the FSF is complying with the law. It has to.

And that is right, however, don't generalize, it shall comply to
specific laws, not to rumors. See above generalization vs. specifics.

> > find it very rude to be calling civilians to go to war. i find it
> > very very rude to be coming from FSF.
> 
> That literally never happened. The FSF never called for anyone to go
> to war.

But his viewpoint is understandable. That is what I said, when
representative of organization expresses his private opinion, that
opinion shall be separate, individual, best not even told on
Libreplanet mailing list. Libreplanet is for Russian and Ukrainian
equally. That was small problem, though there is no significant
impact.

> > or am i wrong?
> 
> You are wrong.

And I say, he is wrong. :-)

> As Stallman has said, Devin's answer was incomplete. But he didn't
> say anything wrong. Unless you read way too much into it.

While he did not say anything wrong, he represented FSF and has given
references to FSF. And that caused slight quarrel here.

Next time it will be better.


Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/