• Debian should not engage in politics and stay neutral [was: This is

    From Gilles Filippini@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 9 18:10:02 2021
    Thomas Goirand a écrit le 09/04/2021 à 17:27 :
    Please let me know
    I'm not alone.

    You're not.
    Thx,

    _g.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Goirand@21:1/5 to Sam Hartman on Fri Apr 9 17:40:02 2021
    On 4/7/21 7:27 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:

    I wasn't thrilled with Steve's message; I sent him what I hope are some constructive comments privately.
    Bringing up nazis is rarely going to calm things down or promote constructive discussion.
    And yes, he did that.

    But Adrian! You really doubled down on the tension.
    I appreciate that you are frustrated and disagree strongly with some of
    what Steve is saying.

    I hear that you would like to have a discussion on how our diversity statement interacts with organizations people affiliatef with.

    Doubling down on the nazi thing isn't going to give us a constructive or healthy discussion.
    There are ways to have the discussion you are looking for that will be
    more constructive and that will not promote quite so much of aflame war.


    It sounds like you aren't feeling heard.
    The particular example you picked is only likely to escalate things so
    that none of us are hearing each other.

    Please let us find a way to step back, listen to your concerns, but also respect the other people involved.


    To the contrary, I haven't found anything in Adrian's post aggressive,
    and very much, he is pointing at a topic we may want to address.

    It's been said that RMS current issue is his *personal* view on some
    topics, which aren't related to his work at FSF. One may agree with him
    or not, or find what he wrote unacceptable or not, disgusting or not.
    This isn't what I would like to discuss.

    The point is: is there some restrictions on political views that the
    Debian community/project would like to enforce? I've heard someone
    complaining that the Debian project hasn't made a statement about black
    live maters and George Floyd. Is it ok if I believe in Communist and
    strongly support the Chinese government, including the social
    engineering part? Am I allowed to be a Trump supporter, denying the
    climate change is man made?

    More disturbing things now... What if I'm working for NSA, and
    contribute to Debian so that the US government can spy even better on
    everyone? What if I'm working in Russia, and contribute to Debian for
    improving the army missile guidance system? Or if I'm contracted by the
    Chinese government so that they can use Debian to better track their
    citizens? Is all of that OK as a contribution to Debian?

    What if I were fighting against same sex marriage? Or if I was at the
    head of a company hiring people $1 per day to make shoes in Indonesia?

    My own view on this is *very* liberal. In my view, we should allow
    absolutely all of the above, without any restriction. Why? Simply
    because otherwise, it's impossible to draw the line and set reasonable
    limits, without having infinite flame wars in our lists, which distract
    us from our very important missing: being the best free operating
    system. BTW, what's the RC bugs count for Bullseye? :)

    I've joined Debian because of its technical excellence, and I'm staying
    because I believe in software freedom. I am trying to force myself to
    not have too many interference on the interactions I have with other DDs because of political topics (and that, even though it itches a lot as I
    really love to share my ideas). I very much would like other DDs to try
    to do the same if possible. It would be great if we all agree that
    Debian is *not* the place to have this kind of political debates. There
    are other places to do that. Engage yourself in politics, if you want,
    but outside of Debian. I will deeply respect it, and will enjoy talking politics with you (I very much enjoy any political talks, and I do have
    very strong opinions on some topics), but simply, outside of Debian is
    better.

    The DFSG and social contract are there so that there's one thing we must
    agree on. I haven't signed up for one side of the political spectrum.
    Please respect this.

    Though as time passes, I'm seeing all of these lines increasingly
    blurred. I hope for Debian to not become too engaged (promoting views I
    share or not).

    And there's what Adrian wrote:

    If membership in Debian would imply anything about political opinions,
    this could get some of our members into untenable positions where
    I would be worried about their safety.

    which I very much agree with. We also don't want Debian to become banned
    from some countries because the project is too much engaged into
    political debates (no need to name a particular country here I suppose...).

    I'm sure I'm not the only person with this opinion. Please let me know
    I'm not alone.

    Cheers,

    Thomas Goirand (zigo)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pierre-Elliott =?utf-8?B?QsOpY3Vl?=@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 9 18:10:02 2021
    Le vendredi 09 avril 2021 à 17:27:30+0200, Thomas Goirand a écrit :
    On 4/7/21 7:27 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:

    I wasn't thrilled with Steve's message; I sent him what I hope are some constructive comments privately.
    Bringing up nazis is rarely going to calm things down or promote constructive discussion.
    And yes, he did that.

    But Adrian! You really doubled down on the tension.
    I appreciate that you are frustrated and disagree strongly with some of what Steve is saying.

    I hear that you would like to have a discussion on how our diversity statement interacts with organizations people affiliatef with.

    Doubling down on the nazi thing isn't going to give us a constructive or healthy discussion.
    There are ways to have the discussion you are looking for that will be
    more constructive and that will not promote quite so much of aflame war.


    It sounds like you aren't feeling heard.
    The particular example you picked is only likely to escalate things so
    that none of us are hearing each other.

    Please let us find a way to step back, listen to your concerns, but also respect the other people involved.


    To the contrary, I haven't found anything in Adrian's post aggressive,
    and very much, he is pointing at a topic we may want to address.

    It's been said that RMS current issue is his *personal* view on some
    topics, which aren't related to his work at FSF. One may agree with him
    or not, or find what he wrote unacceptable or not, disgusting or not.
    This isn't what I would like to discuss.

    The point is: is there some restrictions on political views that the
    Debian community/project would like to enforce? I've heard someone complaining that the Debian project hasn't made a statement about black
    live maters and George Floyd. Is it ok if I believe in Communist and
    strongly support the Chinese government, including the social
    engineering part? Am I allowed to be a Trump supporter, denying the
    climate change is man made?

    More disturbing things now... What if I'm working for NSA, and
    contribute to Debian so that the US government can spy even better on everyone? What if I'm working in Russia, and contribute to Debian for improving the army missile guidance system? Or if I'm contracted by the Chinese government so that they can use Debian to better track their citizens? Is all of that OK as a contribution to Debian?

    What if I were fighting against same sex marriage? Or if I was at the
    head of a company hiring people $1 per day to make shoes in Indonesia?

    My own view on this is *very* liberal. In my view, we should allow
    absolutely all of the above, without any restriction. Why? Simply
    because otherwise, it's impossible to draw the line and set reasonable limits, without having infinite flame wars in our lists, which distract
    us from our very important missing: being the best free operating
    system. BTW, what's the RC bugs count for Bullseye? :)

    I've joined Debian because of its technical excellence, and I'm staying because I believe in software freedom. I am trying to force myself to
    not have too many interference on the interactions I have with other DDs because of political topics (and that, even though it itches a lot as I really love to share my ideas). I very much would like other DDs to try
    to do the same if possible. It would be great if we all agree that
    Debian is *not* the place to have this kind of political debates. There
    are other places to do that. Engage yourself in politics, if you want,
    but outside of Debian. I will deeply respect it, and will enjoy talking politics with you (I very much enjoy any political talks, and I do have
    very strong opinions on some topics), but simply, outside of Debian is better.

    The DFSG and social contract are there so that there's one thing we must agree on. I haven't signed up for one side of the political spectrum.
    Please respect this.

    Though as time passes, I'm seeing all of these lines increasingly
    blurred. I hope for Debian to not become too engaged (promoting views I
    share or not).

    And there's what Adrian wrote:

    If membership in Debian would imply anything about political opinions,
    this could get some of our members into untenable positions where
    I would be worried about their safety.

    which I very much agree with. We also don't want Debian to become banned
    from some countries because the project is too much engaged into
    political debates (no need to name a particular country here I suppose...).

    I'm sure I'm not the only person with this opinion. Please let me know
    I'm not alone.

    Cheers,

    There seem to be for me some confusion here.

    It is not the same at all to accept people with different views and to
    let them express these if they go against the Code of Conduct we voted.
    (and even having stated that, I'd probably feel like asking for the
    expulsion of any nazi if there was one here)

    Apart from that, Debian is political by its mere existence, and
    expressing some opinion on who does or does not help us to achieve our
    goals is quite relevant.

    The fact that you are not alone having this opinion doesn't mean it is
    the most shared one.

    You are free by maintaining the status quo by not paying attention to
    other's political opinion.

    Regards,

    --
    Pierre-Elliott Bécue
    GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
    It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEESYqTBWsFJgT6y8ijKb+g0HkpCsoFAmBwe18ACgkQKb+g0Hkp Cspnlg/+IDJAxY4Be2gk1NpsuQi0uVSVxTIn24iQGmSRidaUogR/GQ2AjGJBQTdy kEbVYLi4IRBoehWuK/H7LegG9gf9bVKhombZRfbMESY7oFykPzrGDEUb9MzU6VPb FE/u3qQI0RsYBBN3IhZUoZJ/2edizshOm5CSqX1YK1M7yrW+T4JJgte55Z57fAlp MrmAR4Kmyf2yC8HXx6W61wxDTLxsSnwf60KUOSNF4HlhKvWCEIticaeG3FPmDV7U mdVp5Q2kG27qy3ERVzVlmQwKOuemlyUFDgn3NvdxSKw9L6aFqDvxNponV6o9G60P sYApjy8yOJ8mVt+FblTHNgKfYC0RFZ3doAarrrvTBIsAkfbvNtRhlG36odJ3Uaxp bJKsPcPFPc5V8qBQZ+9V44WlxK9wzTornuaxcRf9/7NOOx2ziml5VDqKztnqs/pZ Xq/5dLIa3NownjnJtoXZliDiTrORmkWGaa5So8HTo8GZWyFJKf50E3vOjM2iq5F/ mp0B7EDNTvJneSou/++3W3liRZeXKYYhsDOP5yVARxYfa7Oq+k3X3LxA7ydEnflm GuDmZPr2H+GZaBJgDxhZZvjV1ZSgIUddIDfr2DWk8mecM9+Ck8aeenh3xDEYKwi2 w0ADUWE58kyYAsz0IGv+VplCefj7sPVEg8zkK2GuwijqsJsAvS8=
    =gqdP
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1
  • From Roger Shimizu@21:1/5 to zigo@debian.org on Fri Apr 9 18:50:01 2021
    Dear Thomas,

    On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 12:38 AM Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:

    I'm sure I'm not the only person with this opinion. Please let me know
    I'm not alone.

    I stand with your side.
    If you have a chance to come to Tokyo, let's have sake and umeshu together.

    Cheers,
    --
    Roger Shimizu, GMT +9 Tokyo
    PGP/GPG: 4096R/6C6ACD6417B3ACB1

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Felix Lechner@21:1/5 to zigo@debian.org on Fri Apr 9 19:30:01 2021
    Hi Thomas,

    On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 8:38 AM Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:

    I'm sure I'm not the only person with this opinion. Please let me know
    I'm not alone.

    You are not alone. I am intimidated by the crude treatment of fellow
    project members, and by the wanton disregard for the values of
    tolerance so falsely espoused on these lists.

    Kind regards
    Felix Lechner.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jonas Smedegaard@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 9 19:20:01 2021
    Quoting Pierre-Elliott Bécue (2021-04-09 18:05:57)
    Le vendredi 09 avril 2021 � 17:27:30+0200, Thomas Goirand a �crit�:
    The point is: is there some restrictions on political views that the Debian community/project would like to enforce? I've heard someone complaining that the Debian project hasn't made a statement about
    black live maters and George Floyd. Is it ok if I believe in
    Communist and strongly support the Chinese government, including the social engineering part? Am I allowed to be a Trump supporter,
    denying the climate change is man made?

    And there's what Adrian wrote:

    If membership in Debian would imply anything about political
    opinions, this could get some of our members into untenable
    positions where I would be worried about their safety.

    which I very much agree with. We also don't want Debian to become
    banned from some countries because the project is too much engaged
    into political debates (no need to name a particular country here I suppose...).

    [...]

    There seem to be for me some confusion here.

    Could your confusion perhaps stem from your reading "politics" as
    meaning "any societal topic" where Thomas and Adrian seemingly talks
    about "topics not directly tied to making a free software distribution"?


    It is not the same at all to accept people with different views and to
    let them express these if they go against the Code of Conduct we
    voted.

    What does our Code of Conduct have to do with Black Lives Matter or
    Communism or Trump or the topic of our current (non-DPL) vote?

    [ irrelevant distracting personal opinion snipped ]


    Apart from that, Debian is political by its mere existence, and
    expressing some opinion on who does or does not help us to achieve our
    goals is quite relevant.

    Seems Thomas and Adrian are not talking about everything being
    political, but about whether or not Debian should *widen* the scope of
    *which* political topics to care for.


    The fact that you are not alone having this opinion doesn't mean it is
    the most shared one.

    Sorry, what is your point here? Do only majority viewpoints matter?


    - Jonas

    --
    * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
    * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

    [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private --==============@17111581860624780=MIME-Version: 1.0
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    Content-Description: signature
    Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"; charset="us-ascii"

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEn+Ppw2aRpp/1PMaELHwxRsGgASEFAmBwh40ACgkQLHwxRsGg ASGBLxAAhyPbL0X/3Geowr+3e96w+uT6SWtuwKXrldvdr2H6IwlOqiUHIJRARRxv Irr6PbL/XJhIPS9FtYKad9Rh0jdqwk3d/Kf1q1W5CtDT9zoDWJmp125LborME/aA ambI6bFivcfkL6ykx/e7lu3HTf2KWTqKpPrYsbrYjS/M1TsKsk79koShCWOxjFnl ZOKkiFHCmhlZBZWTanHZ+6+e5CBcOgKYW8J9rwKzU2rt0DDsRdSCfvtXzOd1JfV4 gqZLWj1hGVPOpGfDRJf8YFhPyavMSHRuz7VBf+T2PC8L7RDzfrShO6rcYI2Ma0yD 5CWl2OpofuTO6+c10r0bvZmGhC3AfgSnVAvOaP2WCLt2K1Y7yPkWOOActLMHvjoG fS9IHJOiW68JTtjHCBaIhV30nq95xCPacspP3eJElqsXlja8pjO/1EdL1vTBHmqY hycoZs979zuJV7xXI2oygEXpReej+qoGD+WIzjZJYv/ltuxsiUWQi/EuDUGzlM8u eePjPX523LYbMgGk3
  • From Russ Allbery@21:1/5 to Thomas Goirand on Fri Apr 9 19:40:02 2021
    Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> writes:

    The point is: is there some restrictions on political views that the
    Debian community/project would like to enforce?

    I could be wrong, but I think you're making an implicit assumption here
    that I would disagree with, namely that having the project issue a
    political statement is equivalent to enforcing a restriction on what
    political views a member of the project can hold. I don't think these are
    at all the same thing.

    First, as a general principle, I don't believe it is permissible for any person, organization, or institution to ever dictate or restrict the
    thoughts inside your head. This might seem like a hair-splitting
    distinction and probably isn't what you meant by views, but for various
    reasons it's important to me personally. Your thoughts are your own, and absolutely no one else gets a say in what you think. People are entitled
    to draw conclusions about how you act or what you say, to choose not to
    want to associate with you, etc., but no one is entitled to try to read
    your mind or to try to police your thoughts.

    The question to me, therefore, would at most be about restrictions on
    people's actions or speech, on something that happens outside of their
    head, not on their views, which are private and deserve the highest level
    of privacy protection.

    Here, I believe it's common for organizations to take political positions
    or participate in poltiical arguments where they believe those politics
    are relevant to their mission, and with the understanding that not
    everyone who supports the organization will agree with all of their
    political positions. I am a member of many organizations that sometimes
    take stances with which I disagree, sometimes vigorously. I make an
    ongoing decision whether to support that organization anyway or whether to withdraw my support based on a balance of many factors. Agreement with my political views is only one factor.

    Similarly, on the organization side, it's entirely routine for
    organizations to have members who are in active disagreement with the
    larger organization about some policy or stance or position. Provided
    that disagreement isn't over a core value, it can be healthy. It's also routine for people to choose where and when to express that disagreement.

    Let me use an obviously absurd but hopefully not politically fraught
    example. I might support and volunteer for the local art museum but truly
    hate pointillism. I can still continue to volunteer and support the
    museum even though they have a large pointillism exhibit. That exhibit
    may make me rather unhappy, but I might think the other work the museum
    does is worth it anyway. The museum may think that my opinion is absurd,
    but they have some process for deciding what exhibits to host and I can participate in that process and get outvoted. Or maybe I'll convince
    people; who knows. Either way, obviously I am not going to start every volunteer meeting with a rant about how disgusting pointillism is (that
    *would* get me uninvited from the organization), and the museum will
    probably avoid asking me to work on the pointillist exhibit. We can reach
    an accomodation that respects the disagreement without either of us
    changing our beliefs.

    This sort of practical compromise is just part of being in a community.

    Now, that position might be disqualifying for a *leadership* role. If the majority of the museum's supporters love the pointillism exhibit and want
    it to continue, but I wanted to become the museum curator, obviously I
    would need to compromise my stance against pointillism and respect that I
    was in the minority, or I would need to give up my hope of being the
    person in charge of all of the exhibits. That's part of the
    responsibility that goes with having a leadership position; sometimes you
    have to advocate the values of the organization even when they're in
    conflict with your own personal values, or, if the conflict is too severe, resign and return to being an individual member where it's appropriate for
    you to vigorously express your opposition.

    What does all that mean for Debian? I think it means that there has
    always been a tension in the project over people who want Debian to take a
    more overtly political stance and people who want Debian to take as few political stances as possible. This happens *all the time* over free
    software politics; for example, some people think the project's stance on firmware is absurd and vigorously oppose it. They are in the minority and Debian hasn't changed its policies, and they haven't all resigned or been driven out, so clearly we are already capable of tolerating political differences in both directions.

    None of this resolves the question of what topics Debian should take a political stance on and what topics Debian should leave alone. I think we
    all have different viewpoints on that, and we have a governance process
    that lets us work out that disagreement and make project decisions in the
    face of a disagreement, and we're going through that process now. This is
    all healthy and normal.

    But I think it's important to emphasize that even if Debian as a project
    takes a political position on something, that does not imply that every individual in Debian agrees with that position, or that one has to leave
    the project if one does not agree with that position. That's a separate
    and much more serious additional step.

    In some cases, we may wish to take that step. For example, if someone
    wishes to advocate within the project that free software is an evil plot
    to steal the intellectual property of the world's great software
    companies, Debian is probably not the place for them and there's probably
    no benefit to either them or the project to try to make that work. And
    there will be arguments over when to take that step, and vigorous debate,
    and then we have a governance process to use to make those decisions.

    But we should not confuse the two. Taking a political position as a
    project is not the same thing as setting rules for what type of advocacy
    we are willing to let people do with project resources, and that is not
    the same thing as setting minimum standards of behavior for project
    members, and none of those things are the same thing as trying to restrict people's *thoughts* (which is something we absolutely should not ever do).

    --
    Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tiago Bortoletto Vaz@21:1/5 to Thomas Goirand on Fri Apr 9 20:20:02 2021
    Hi Thomas, I'm avoiding this debate, still I'm writing this one because (1) I know you listen :-) and (2) one of your statements has been repeated many times already and it kind of bothers me:

    On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 05:27:30PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
    [...]

    It's been said that RMS current issue is his *personal* view on some
    topics, which aren't related to his work at FSF. One may agree with him
    or not, or find what he wrote unacceptable or not, disgusting or not.
    This isn't what I would like to discuss.

    Please, let's first agree that it's not (only) about his 'personal view on some topics'. Most people defending RMS on this list seem to have suddenly s/actions/views/g in their spell checker. So, just to put words back to their place: it's about his incessant *actions* over the years, which may or may not been directly connected with his (publicly stated) views. And his *actions*, and not his views alone, have hurt the community in many many ways. And this community is about software freedom, the thing you said you believe on, and the thing that keeps you motivated to contribute to Debian. This community is somewhat leaded by the FSF, which has close links to Debian and a huge influence to the future of free/libre software. How can one compare that to 'Debian taking position climate change'?

    Yes, you may find that the letter makes unfair accusations. Fine, then you do not sign it, and you vote against it. And you make your point as you're doing in this list (thanks for always being gentle in such heated situations). And
    if by any chance Debian signs that letter as a project, you feel frustrated as I'll also feel in case another given option wins.

    But please, please: even if Debian is not the place you chose to exercise
    human values such as solidarity and care; even being Debian only about 'software freedom' and technical excellence, you can still realize that taking a position on this particular issue isn't at all disconnected to your 'apolitical' and pragmatic motivations. I really see the point you're trying to bring, but the reality is so distinct from the hypothetical situations you're drawing here :\

    The point is: is there some restrictions on political views that the
    Debian community/project would like to enforce? I've heard someone complaining that the Debian project hasn't made a statement about black
    live maters and George Floyd. Is it ok if I believe in Communist and
    strongly support the Chinese government, including the social
    engineering part? Am I allowed to be a Trump supporter, denying the
    climate change is man made?

    Well, I do think some people would like to push their political views on Debian, yes. And this, in every possible political spectrum. But this is not really happening, for reasons we can try to infer: maybe they feel that some issues as climate change and defeating communism aren't connected enough to Debian as a project in order to justify a public statement or a GR. It'd be probably hard to get support for those, I suppose. On the other hand, it seems there is a reason for all the seconds on the current GR, and despite some aggressive opposition, the reason is not that Debian is infested of SJW willing to take over the power to push their oppressive agenda (I'm sorry for those who still believe on this, you're just too wrong).

    More disturbing things now... What if I'm working for NSA, and
    contribute to Debian so that the US government can spy even better on everyone?

    I don't think NSA will spy better if you worked for them. I believe you'd end up as our best whistleblower ever :-) Seriously, on such cases, my own view is that software freedom comes first, and I find it a bit of a false dilemma having to choose between software freedom vs. not being spied. This applies for your other examples as well.

    What if I'm working in Russia, and contribute to Debian for
    improving the army missile guidance system? Or if I'm contracted by the Chinese government so that they can use Debian to better track their citizens? Is all of that OK as a contribution to Debian?

    What if I were fighting against same sex marriage? Or if I was at the
    head of a company hiring people $1 per day to make shoes in Indonesia?

    My own view on this is *very* liberal. In my view, we should allow
    absolutely all of the above, without any restriction. Why? Simply
    because otherwise, it's impossible to draw the line and set reasonable limits, without having infinite flame wars in our lists, which distract
    us from our very important missing: being the best free operating
    system. BTW, what's the RC bugs count for Bullseye? :)

    Thomas, many of those people who're skilled enough to close these bugs also care about Debian in a broader view. Probably not as broad as Debian-and-the-climate-change, but for sure about the role of Debian as a project, in keeping the free software ecosystem healthy, inclusive and stronger. That's the point I'm trying to make here: some, including you, are going too far on this, as this position (yet to be taken) on RMS/FSF were similar to taking position on all kinds of random political views that have no direct impact to our work. Again: those do not exist for a reason.

    I've joined Debian because of its technical excellence, and I'm staying because I believe in software freedom. I am trying to force myself to
    not have too many interference on the interactions I have with other DDs because of political topics (and that, even though it itches a lot as I really love to share my ideas). I very much would like other DDs to try
    to do the same if possible. It would be great if we all agree that
    Debian is *not* the place to have this kind of political debates. There
    are other places to do that. Engage yourself in politics, if you want,
    but outside of Debian. I will deeply respect it, and will enjoy talking politics with you (I very much enjoy any political talks, and I do have
    very strong opinions on some topics), but simply, outside of Debian is better.

    The DFSG and social contract are there so that there's one thing we must agree on. I haven't signed up for one side of the political spectrum.
    Please respect this.

    I don't see how it's not being respected. This is not a provocation, and I can be wrong. Where the project is forcing you to sign up for a political side? If it's about the GR, you have many options, including not to vote, or making your vote public to oppose the majority if your option doesn't win. Or signing as individual a letter of support, posting your neutral position in your blog etc. Or doing all that. Or doing nothing at all. I pretty much doubt that someone will ever consider a GR result as a single position shared by all DDs.

    Though as time passes, I'm seeing all of these lines increasingly
    blurred. I hope for Debian to not become too engaged (promoting views I
    share or not).

    And there's what Adrian wrote:

    If membership in Debian would imply anything about political opinions,
    this could get some of our members into untenable positions where
    I would be worried about their safety.

    which I very much agree with. We also don't want Debian to become banned
    from some countries because the project is too much engaged into
    political debates (no need to name a particular country here I suppose...).

    I'm sure I'm not the only person with this opinion. Please let me know
    I'm not alone.

    I fear that too, although I think the more neutral we keep, stronger will be those oppressive governments. There's no simple solution for this, indeed.

    Cheers,

    Thomas Goirand (zigo)

    Bests,

    --
    Tiago

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Iustin Pop@21:1/5 to Tiago Bortoletto Vaz on Fri Apr 9 21:20:02 2021
    On 2021-04-09 14:11:11, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:
    On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 05:27:30PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
    [...]
    I've joined Debian because of its technical excellence, and I'm staying because I believe in software freedom. I am trying to force myself to
    not have too many interference on the interactions I have with other DDs because of political topics (and that, even though it itches a lot as I really love to share my ideas). I very much would like other DDs to try
    to do the same if possible. It would be great if we all agree that
    Debian is *not* the place to have this kind of political debates. There
    are other places to do that. Engage yourself in politics, if you want,
    but outside of Debian. I will deeply respect it, and will enjoy talking politics with you (I very much enjoy any political talks, and I do have very strong opinions on some topics), but simply, outside of Debian is better.

    +1.

    The DFSG and social contract are there so that there's one thing we must agree on. I haven't signed up for one side of the political spectrum. Please respect this.

    I don't see how it's not being respected. This is not a provocation, and I can
    be wrong. Where the project is forcing you to sign up for a political side? If
    it's about the GR, you have many options, including not to vote, or making your
    vote public to oppose the majority if your option doesn't win. Or signing as individual a letter of support, posting your neutral position in your blog etc.
    Or doing all that. Or doing nothing at all. I pretty much doubt that someone will ever consider a GR result as a single position shared by all DDs.

    But how it is to be interpreted otherwise? How will someone external to
    Debian know to interpret this fine line, and how can individual DDs not
    be associated with *whatever* the result is?

    I am with Thomas on this side. It's not about choice X vs choice Y, but
    to a project-wide choice at all, whatever it is. Other people won't know
    if I voted at all, or voted FD, or voted against the final result, or
    for it.

    regards,
    iustin

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Iustin Pop@21:1/5 to Thomas Goirand on Fri Apr 9 21:20:02 2021
    On 2021-04-09 17:27:30, Thomas Goirand wrote:
    The DFSG and social contract are there so that there's one thing we must agree on. I haven't signed up for one side of the political spectrum.
    Please respect this.

    Though as time passes, I'm seeing all of these lines increasingly
    blurred. I hope for Debian to not become too engaged (promoting views I
    share or not).

    And there's what Adrian wrote:

    If membership in Debian would imply anything about political opinions,
    this could get some of our members into untenable positions where
    I would be worried about their safety.

    which I very much agree with. We also don't want Debian to become banned
    from some countries because the project is too much engaged into
    political debates (no need to name a particular country here I suppose...).

    I'm sure I'm not the only person with this opinion. Please let me know
    I'm not alone.

    I, too, strongly support this point of view.

    regards,
    iustin

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Adrian Bunk@21:1/5 to Tiago Bortoletto Vaz on Sat Apr 10 00:00:01 2021
    On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 02:11:11PM -0400, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:
    ...
    Please, let's first agree that it's not (only) about his 'personal view on some
    topics'. Most people defending RMS on this list seem to have suddenly s/actions/views/g in their spell checker. So, just to put words back to their place: it's about his incessant *actions* over the years, which may or may not
    been directly connected with his (publicly stated) views. And his *actions*, and not his views alone, have hurt the community in many many ways. And this community is about software freedom, the thing you said you believe on, and the
    thing that keeps you motivated to contribute to Debian.
    ...

    This community would not exist without the actions of RMS.

    RMS founded the free software movement.
    RMS created the GNU project.
    RMS wrote emacs for the GNU project.
    RMS wrote gcc for the GNU project.
    RMS wrote gdb for the GNU project.
    RMS wrote the GPL.
    RMS founded the FSF.

    Linus Torvalds originally used a non-free licence for Linux,
    before switching to the GPL.
    The core of Debian are the tools from the GNU project.
    In the early days of Debian, RMS through the FSF employed
    the DPL full-time for his work on Debian.

    An open letter stating there would be "no place in the free software
    community" for RMS is hugely offensive for many people who are aware
    that the free software community would not exist without RMS.

    RMS has always been a polarizing figure in the 38 years since he founded
    the free software movement, but the same traits that make him difficult
    are the reason why he stubbornly created this community against all
    obstacles.

    cu
    Adrian

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Russ Allbery@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 10 00:30:02 2021
    We just had a week of this on debian-vote. Can we please not have another
    week of it on debian-project?

    It's one thing to debate larger issues about the project's stance on
    politics more generally, but at this point we're just rearguing the GR in progress, which has already gone through a discussion period. Everyone's repeating the same things they already said, and the chances of anyone
    changing their mind are slim. You can now go vote your opinion rather
    than having to write more mail about it.

    --
    Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Steve Langasek@21:1/5 to Adrian Bunk on Sat Apr 10 00:20:01 2021
    On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 12:48:30AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
    On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 02:11:11PM -0400, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:

    Please, let's first agree that it's not (only) about his 'personal view on some
    topics'. Most people defending RMS on this list seem to have suddenly s/actions/views/g in their spell checker. So, just to put words back to their
    place: it's about his incessant *actions* over the years, which may or may not
    been directly connected with his (publicly stated) views. And his *actions*,
    and not his views alone, have hurt the community in many many ways. And this
    community is about software freedom, the thing you said you believe on, and the
    thing that keeps you motivated to contribute to Debian.
    ...

    This community would not exist without the actions of RMS.

    RMS founded the free software movement.
    RMS created the GNU project.
    RMS wrote emacs for the GNU project.
    RMS wrote gcc for the GNU project.
    RMS wrote gdb for the GNU project.
    RMS wrote the GPL.
    RMS founded the FSF.

    Linus Torvalds originally used a non-free licence for Linux,
    before switching to the GPL.
    The core of Debian are the tools from the GNU project.
    In the early days of Debian, RMS through the FSF employed
    the DPL full-time for his work on Debian.

    An open letter stating there would be "no place in the free software community" for RMS is hugely offensive for many people who are aware
    that the free software community would not exist without RMS.

    RMS has always been a polarizing figure in the 38 years since he founded
    the free software movement, but the same traits that make him difficult
    are the reason why he stubbornly created this community against all obstacles.

    Microsoft catalyzed the democratization of the Internet by contributing to
    the boom of low-cost commodity PCs; and without the rise of the Internet,
    the Free Software movement would not have taken off.

    Should we therefore put Bill Gates on a pedestal due to his historic contributions to the rise of Free Software, ignoring all negatives?

    --
    Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEErEg/aN5yj0PyIC/KVo0w8yGyEz0FAmBwztoACgkQVo0w8yGy Ez13bxAArpVTtoO0q0g3UZh10rnXEUa8CCmruSKKGkcUUMIsv/mjqYTc20DLORgf H+WpHJ8mR7ssxU9z6hU1263UU0ugJTq+F2AIf+Bfo517RKtvvZ94QXivTEKvOLcB z0TjtEWstrWxmMpjYR5s/ZATOhe7lgIfQTH8mhC03PXg+8neWMQk3sy4tFoRHEQT ihx7rUHeZ2vlJYffcHb+Scmb5hl+QLysa4xAVagAhXy0StskJXlsvqlkC1EQkCCR odVKRDLsgXvib/ECaEfqibDSvJSIu4o2TT+aSYfUTEtDYTYetJA2mA+EIcx2VBmj AQYRLowNgwAkPp+Kokvg1X8ci3lzaJBU3LFOlZeKSVdmXbT+ZZ9afZeTZpliOMEq fpuYI6hlpkYQE/65K4zJ5BHsriL09md76uMctrKULnli+7sEu7UP/L6vJHCMopgd bDaAwkN4Am6ox8xbxNfs027LZS9FWibr5oTqtd93+mOND3iy29+z0eOzq5SAudiO r8i+h7plD8QIkiUFIk2Ya4CUbXXMS5ZzB4NpRDI5DzWTDIjLdQ3l24IwQ9atH3Hl Hxs6jhILJmMcT2fZFbJS
  • From tomas@tuxteam.de@21:1/5 to Russ Allbery on Sat Apr 10 10:00:02 2021
    On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 03:14:56PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
    We just had a week of this on debian-vote. Can we please not have another week of it on debian-project?

    [...]

    Thanks, Russ.

    A couple of folks shouting their strong opinions and not listening
    isn't going anywhere constructive.

    Cheers
    - t

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAmBxUMwACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZpcwCeLz9RVTBENMNcCyK7Nxg7bWLD Y3AAn3uTiweOXO3//+Ia4s2eax1lMUV6
    =HCGG
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Goirand@21:1/5 to Adrian Bunk on Sat Apr 10 18:20:02 2021
    On 4/9/21 11:48 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
    On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 02:11:11PM -0400, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:
    [...]

    [...]

    cu
    Adrian

    I was about to reply, but Adrian and Iustin more or less wrote what I
    would have (and I don't want to repeat in a different manner).

    On 4/10/21 12:02 AM, Steve Langasek wrote:
    Microsoft catalyzed the democratization of the Internet by
    contributing to the boom of low-cost commodity PCs; and without
    the rise of the Internet, the Free Software movement would not
    have taken off.

    The first computer I used to connect to Internet was an Atari Falcon
    using MiNT (Mint Is Not/Now Tos, not the Linux distro), which was also
    my first Unix computer. Without Microsoft, I probably would still be
    running an Atari compatible machine.

    At the time I had:
    - CAB as a web browser
    - Virtual tty (ALT - F1 to F9, F10 being the AES desktop)
    - a nice mail client (was it named OMail ?)
    - GCC 2.x running on minixfs

    :)

    For my own case, I have been driven to Linux because Windows was so much
    a bad product, and hated it compared to my previous Atari running MiNT,
    which was already running a big chunk of its OS with free software.

    Cheers,

    Thomas Goirand (zigo)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)