MESSAGE
| DATE | 2020-02-15 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] GNU Social Contract version 1.0
|
On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 07:25:56PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Hello Andreas (R.),
>
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 02:14:32PM +0100, Andreas R. wrote:
> > Could you clarify what this cut-off date of February the 24th means? What
> > happens afterwards?
>
> afterwards we know who endorses and who does not :-)
Hi Andeas!
This is most definitely part of the problem. You fail to understand
just how offensive you are. This is a smartalick response. So there
is a culture divide here. In the streets of Brooklyn, we learned to
speak to each other in a respectful way, otherwise you will get a
baseball bat across the back of your head.
He asked you a specific question - which is why did you chose 2/24
and what do you expect to happen next after 2/24. YOur answer was
bullshit.
Here is what we will know afterwards....
the same thing we know now, that your misrepresenting yourself as
having some authoirty over GNU and that GNU works for and depends on
its coding monkeys, I mean its volunteers, for political direct and
governance.
Well it doesn't.
So after that date, you hope that you can establish a stronger political
position by sounding more office and gathering support so that you can
take over GNU and turn it into the opensource movement.
Maybe you will threaten to all quit in masse. I am in favor of that,
BTW. Regardles, your not getting shit out your illegal and fraudulent
website or your emails for endorsement. Gnu is note a popularity
contest, and the bulk of us end users would die before we let you get
your hands on the real power in GNU.
Aint happening.
What you are doing is creating resentment, a great deal of it.
and you are making a few enemies.
>
> > Since there is no reason for this bloc not to exist, even within
> > the GNU project, there should be no reason for any sort of cut-off date.
> > In fact, keeping endorsement open-ended might be exactly the
> > legitimate tool for influencing governance, since maintainers
> > within the block should get, by their own projections, more contributors
> > and make development easier. This should logically lead to a situation
> > where over time the amount of maintainers and contributors inside the bloc
> > would grow up to a point where where any leadership question becomes moot.
>
Which is why Richard should just ban you all now. Thanks for making it
clear that is about taking over GNU.
> I agree with your analysis that trying to form a stronger GNU community
GNU is not a community of hackers. It is a political movement for the
public at large....
> should (and probaby will) be an open-ended process, requiring ongoing efforts
> with all interested people. And maybe people who are not interested in the
> GNU Social Contract now might change their mind later and should get an
> opportunity to join.
There is already a GNU social contract, the GPL3
> At the same time, we wanted to have a clearly defined
> process with a given timeline, so that at its end we know where we stand,
> and who "we" are at this point in time. The idea is not to bug maintainers
> indefinitely about endorsement, but to inform them about the initiative and
> to give them a reasonable time frame to make up their mind for the time being.
>
Fuck you. I will use your software without agreeing to your contract
and I will hack it at will.
So go fuck yourself.
> Andreas (E.)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hangout mailing list
> Hangout-at-nylxs.com
> http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|
