Please stop immediatly!
I've certainly not elected you, I'm not even a member of the FSFE or
your abusive fellowship of data robbers, and I certainly haven't
participated on any election.
You have "sequestered" my personal data for the good of your personal
agenda, and hosted it on systems of other parties. I see that as
extremely big abuse of my personal rights.
I don't care about anything else you have to say, because you haven't
regret it or asked for pardon.
Your abusive and entitled attitude, shows me that they were probably
right in taking those measures. Now stop making us wasting any of our
collective valuable time.
On 04/05/19 12:50, Daniel Pocock wrote:
(fixed address)
On 03/05/2019 23:30, Paul Schaub wrote:
Hello list,
as probably most of us I'm trying to get a clear picture of what
happened and why. On my quest to find answers, and to grasp the
situation as close to truth as possible, I have some questions to
officials of the FSFE.
For a start, are the allegations of "censorship" regarding the blog and
newsletters written by Daniel Pocock true? I dislike the word
censorship, as I can see valid reasons for moderation. Still, is it
true, that Pococks work in the FSFE is being "moderated" and if so,
based on what reasons?
How much moderation is happening on at the FSFE lists?
An email from Matthias Kirschner on 12 September 2018 states:
"Until further notice, your blog is removed from the FSFE's planet
aggregation,
... (snip) ...
we will put you on moderation on our mailing lists,
... (snip) ...
while you remain a member of the FSFE, the publication of our legal
demands would be considered further discrediting the FSFE and
damaging the bond of trust between the members, and as such, would be
considered in any current or future exclusion proceedings."
In other words:
- they censored the representative you elected (me)
- they told me that I can't tell you I was threatened or censored, or
there would be more legal proceedings - a threat on top of a threat
As your representative, it was my duty to tell you both good things and
bad things. If telling the truth is a CoC violation, I'm guilty as
hell. That was my duty.
For example, if you are buying a house and you pay a surveyor to inspect
it, do you want the surveyor to tell you about the defects or do you
want him to tell you nice things so that he won't offend the person
selling the house?
There is an attitude in some free software communities that we have to
hide defects, especially when it concerns money or governance.
What is more, the communities promise transparency. FSFE has a
transparency page:
https://fsfe.org/about/transparency-commitment
and one of the pillars of the Debian Social Contract[1] is the claim "We
will not hide problems"
yet when people speak about problems, they are subject to censorship,
blackmail, veiled threats, humiliations, defamation, lynchings and
secret punishments.
Regards,
Daniel
1. https://www.debian.org/social_contract
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
discuss...@lists.fsfellowship.eu
https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfe.org
https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
