●● IRC: #boycottnovell @ FreeNode: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 ●● ● Dec 22 [00:38] schestowitz >> As is usual, nothing got done today on the migration of the site. Some [00:38] schestowitz >> people wait until the deadline is imminent before they bother. Given my [00:38] schestowitz >> condition today, I am actually relieved not to have this extra stress today. [00:38] schestowitz > Ok. Rest up and stay hydrated, and get well soon. [00:38] schestowitz > [00:38] schestowitz > I have enough space to maybe look at the feasibility of incremental [00:38] schestowitz > backups soon. However, since these are whole database dumps it may not [00:38] schestowitz > be an advantage. [00:42] schestowitz > Sent this two hours ago, hasn't appeared on the FOSDEM list [00:42] schestowitz > [00:42] schestowitz > [00:42] schestowitz > [00:42] schestowitz > -------- Forwarded Message -------- [00:42] schestowitz > Subject: Google, FSFE, safety of women and volunteers [00:42] schestowitz > Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 19:11:09 +0100 [00:42] schestowitz > From: Daniel Pocock [00:42] schestowitz > To: fosdem@lists.fosdem.org [00:42] schestowitz > [00:42] schestowitz > [00:42] schestowitz > Hi all, [00:42] schestowitz > [00:42] schestowitz > This month it appears that at least two women (I hope I haven't missed [00:42] schestowitz > any others) have spoken up about their experiences with Google and FSFE. [00:43] schestowitz > FOSDEM has been accepting money from these organizations and maybe now [00:43] schestowitz > is the time to reject their sponsorship. For those who don't know, FSFE [00:43] schestowitz > receives significant[1] funding from Google, a model that has been [00:43] schestowitz > compared to tobacco industry sock puppets[2]. [00:43] schestowitz > [00:43] schestowitz > Timnit Gebru was told to censor[3] a research paper. She refused and [00:43] schestowitz > she was sacked. She had the courage to speak up. [00:43] schestowitz > [00:43] schestowitz > Susanne Eiswirt and Galia Mancheva were the only two female permanent [00:43] schestowitz > employees at FSFE. According to another courageous blog[4], they spoke [00:43] schestowitz > about why women are paid less and they were almost immediately fired, [00:43] schestowitz > both of them. [00:43] schestowitz > [00:43] schestowitz > The intimidation described in those blogs is comparable[5] to the [00:43] schestowitz > intimidation I faced after volunteers decided to elect me as a community [00:43] schestowitz > representative. As I was never an employee of Google or FSFE, as I was [00:43] schestowitz > elected, they couldn't sack me. After I resigned, they have been [00:43] schestowitz > spreading defamation, sabotaging my contributions to other projects like [00:43] schestowitz > Debian, sending me threats, just as described in Galia's blog. [00:43] schestowitz > [00:43] schestowitz > I first met FSFE at FOSDEM. I would hate to see any other visitor or [00:43] schestowitz > volunteer suffer what Galia and other people, especially women, have [00:43] schestowitz > described. [00:43] schestowitz > [00:43] schestowitz > During my time as fellowship representative, I frequently heard from [00:43] schestowitz > people who didn't just quit FSFE, they quit free software altogether [00:43] schestowitz > because their experience with FSFE was so bad. It is the duty of any [00:43] schestowitz > elected representative to report that. [00:43] schestowitz > [00:43] schestowitz > Many free software organizations made a big fuss about banning Jacob [00:43] schestowitz > Appelbaum yet /not one woman ever took him to court/. While I don't [00:43] schestowitz > want to deter anybody with a genuine case from speaking up, I'm [00:43] schestowitz > convinced that at least some of the claims against him appear to be [00:43] schestowitz > exaggerated[6]. In comparison, multiple women have showed significant [00:43] schestowitz > courage facing Google and FSFE in the courtroom. Therefore, should [00:43] schestowitz > Google, FSFE and Matthias Kirschner face the same treatment as Appelbaum [00:43] schestowitz > and be publicly shamed and excluded at every opportunity? [00:43] schestowitz > [00:43] schestowitz > Regards, [00:43] schestowitz > [00:44] schestowitz > Daniel [00:44] schestowitz > [00:44] schestowitz > -- [00:44] schestowitz > Debian Developer [00:44] schestowitz > https://danielpocock.com [00:44] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-danielpocock.com | Daniel Pocock's personal blog [00:44] schestowitz > [00:44] schestowitz > 1. https://fsfe.org/donate/thankgnus.en.html [00:44] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-fsfe.org | Our Donors - FSFE [00:44] schestowitz > 2. [00:44] schestowitz > https://venturebeat.com/2020/12/11/what-big-tech-and-big-tobacco-research-funding-have-in-common/ [00:44] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-venturebeat.com | What Big Tech and Big Tobacco research funding have in common | VentureBeat [00:44] schestowitz > 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timnit_Gebru [00:44] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-en.wikipedia.org | Timnit Gebru - Wikipedia [00:44] schestowitz > 4. https://write.as/malinagalina/i-took-fsfe-to-court [00:44] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-write.as | --------- I took FSFE to court. malinagalina [00:44] schestowitz > 5. [00:44] schestowitz > https://fsfellowship.eu/court-case-fsfe-women-and-volunteers-face-modern-day-slavery/ [00:44] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-fsfellowship.eu | Court case: Matthias Kirschner, FSFE women and volunteers face modern day slavery [00:44] schestowitz > 6. [00:44] schestowitz > https://danielpocock.com/debian-falsified-harassment-claims-appelbaum-expulsion/ [00:44] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-danielpocock.com | Debian falsified harassment claims in Appelbaum expulsion [00:50] *rianne_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) [00:50] *liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) [00:51] *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell [00:52] *liberty_box (~liberty@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell ● Dec 22 [01:20] *rianne_ has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) [01:22] *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell ● Dec 22 [02:12] schestowitz " [02:12] schestowitz We wish you and your loved ones a Merry Christmas and good health, success, new horizons and happiness in the New Year! [02:12] schestowitz Have a refreshing and restful winter break, stay healthy and cheerful. See you in January, until then. [02:12] schestowitz " ● Dec 22 [08:02] schestowitz x https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/531044-krebs-us-should-be-cautious-about-escalating-cyber-war-with-russia [08:02] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-thehill.com | Krebs: US should be 'cautious' about escalating cyber war with Russia | TheHill [08:02] schestowitz # microsofters [08:04] schestowitz
  • [08:04] schestowitz
    Mothers Are Pushing to Free Their Children From Prison During COVID
    [08:04] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-truthout.org | Mothers Are Pushing to Free Their Children From Prison During COVID [08:04] schestowitz
    • [08:04] schestowitz https://www.mintpressnews.com/bth-propaganda-pandemic-the-craziest-covid-claims-of-the-year/273817/ [08:04] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-www.mintpressnews.com | Propaganda Pandemic: The Craziest COVID Claims Of The Year [08:32] schestowitz https://www.mintpressnews.com/trump-enacts-sweeping-new-sanctions-china-iran-venezuela-biden-promises-come/273811/ [08:32] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-www.mintpressnews.com | Trump Enacts Sweeping New Sanctions on China, Iran, Venezuela. Biden Promises More To Come [08:34] schestowitz https://www.mintpressnews.com/a-slap-in-the-face-anger-at-pelosi-democrats-over-paltry-600-stimulus-check/273803/ [08:34] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-www.mintpressnews.com | A Slap in the Face: Anger at Pelosi, Democrats Over Paltry $600 Stimulus Check ● Dec 22 [11:59] *rianne_ has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) ● Dec 22 [12:00] *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell [12:01] *rianne_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) [12:01] *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell [12:57] *rianne_ has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) [12:57] *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell ● Dec 22 [13:15] schestowitz
  • [13:15] schestowitz
    Congress (Once Again) Sells Out To Hollywood: Sneaks CASE Act And Felony Streaming Bill Into Government Funding Omnibus
    [13:15] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-www.techdirt.com | Congress (Once Again) Sells Out To Hollywood: Sneaks CASE Act And Felony Streaming Bill Into Government Funding Omnibus | Techdirt [13:15] schestowitz
    [13:15] schestowitz

    As we warned about earlier this month, it appears that Congress has in fact put two very controversial copyright provisions into the government funding "omnibus" bill that will be voted on later today. As you may have heard, last night Congress worked out a "deal" on both a $900 billion Covid relief/stimulus package and the giant $1.4 trillion omnibus government funding bill, which is being voted on today. There had [13:15] schestowitz been concerns raised all month about how -- under pressure from Hollywood -- Congress might try to sneak two dangerous copyright provisions and one trademark provision into the omnibus.

    • ● Dec 22 [16:47] *rianne_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) [16:47] *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell [16:50] *rianne_ has quit (Client Quit) [16:50] *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell ● Dec 22 [18:00] schestowitz Easy, simple-- optional [18:00] schestowitz >> I need to think how to approach this. He's a good person, but taking [18:00] schestowitz > time to think how to respond would be better. [18:00] schestowitz > [18:00] schestowitz > I am just trying to leave, Roy. That's all I wanted. I have plenty to [18:00] schestowitz > say about what I think these "concerned" people are saying about/doing [18:00] schestowitz > to Stallman, but I won't be writing about it on TR. [18:00] schestowitz > [18:00] schestowitz > I already quoted the comments I think are akin to waving me around as a [18:00] schestowitz > party favour for these trolls, I don't feel good about anything that's [18:00] schestowitz > happening. I don't think I'm likely mistaken either (nor would I phrase [18:00] schestowitz > things as I have if I did think so) but I would rather just walk away [18:00] schestowitz > than go to war with you. [18:00] schestowitz > [18:00] schestowitz > My theory is that when I left you expected me to start poisoning the [18:00] schestowitz > well, and you decided to preempt it. I REALLY can't think of any other [18:00] schestowitz > explanation for what you're doing. The trust is gone. I'm not looking to [18:00] schestowitz > rebuild it and I'm not asking you for anything either. The only reason [18:00] schestowitz > I'm offering this as a potentional solution is to make each of our lives [18:00] schestowitz > easier. I don't care if makes things easier for you, as long as it does [18:00] schestowitz > that for me. [18:00] schestowitz > [18:00] schestowitz > You don't have to publish what I sent. Maybe you're already doing it [18:00] schestowitz > while I type this, I don't regret it if that's what's happening. It's [18:00] schestowitz > already in the logs, otherwise that quote at the top wouldn't be there, [18:00] schestowitz > right? But if it isn't true or accurate then you don't need to publish it. [18:00] schestowitz > [18:00] schestowitz > I've always tried to send you accurate information. My HOPE (in vain) [18:00] schestowitz > was that if you know better (because everybody knows you know a fuck of [18:00] schestowitz > a lot, I don't dispute that at all) we would talk and fix up the weaker [18:01] schestowitz > parts. That's not your style of publishing and you called it censorship [18:01] schestowitz > via editing. I was willing to call it collaboration. But it never [18:01] schestowitz > happened that way. This is relevant to what I'm sending now. [18:01] schestowitz > [18:01] schestowitz > I'm very uncomfortable with the major disparity between the things [18:01] schestowitz > you've said to me in the past and the things you've said after I left. [18:01] schestowitz > I'm concerned that after years of working really hard to do something [18:01] schestowitz > beneficial to both you and this movement, you're going to side with [18:01] schestowitz > people who are conflating attacking Stallman's attackers with attacking [18:01] schestowitz > Stallman himself! [18:01] schestowitz > [18:01] schestowitz > I wouldn't think you're foolish enough to do that-- but since I'm not [18:01] schestowitz > around, or at least trying to walk away, seriously, It's not my concern [18:01] schestowitz > if you buy that cheap line they're throwing out. Open Source used to try [18:01] schestowitz > to own Free Software and then say you were attacking Free Software if [18:01] schestowitz > you criticised Open Source. It's a familiar pattern, what they appear to [18:01] schestowitz > be doing. [18:01] schestowitz > [18:01] schestowitz > But it doesn't bother me if you disagree, or even if I'm right and [18:01] schestowitz > (hypothetically) you're not, as long as you're not acting like I'm some [18:01] schestowitz > troll that walked in to bother TR for a couple of years. Now you say [18:01] schestowitz > "He's a good person"-- you don't need to say that even, you don't need [18:01] schestowitz > to throw me a parade as I leave, just don't paint me to be someone you [18:01] schestowitz > disagree with so much on if that's not really true. [18:01] schestowitz > [18:01] schestowitz > I never thought we agreed on everything. I also didn't think we were on [18:01] schestowitz > opposite sides. You should have mentioned it. Maybe you did? [18:01] schestowitz > [18:01] schestowitz > I'm not interested in going to war with you. I don't have the interest [18:01] schestowitz > and I have better things to do. If you say several things that lead me [18:01] schestowitz > to feel I need to defend myself, I will-- but I'd rather do it just the [18:01] schestowitz > once. And of course I know this going in the logs anyway. [18:01] schestowitz > [18:01] schestowitz > I don't expect you to not report on things that are relevant, if you [18:01] schestowitz > need to do so. But I won't have you doing to me what was done to [18:01] schestowitz > Stallman and Pocock, even if I'm way less important than either of them. [18:01] schestowitz > [18:01] schestowitz > When you leave a normal organisation-- I did nothing to make a stink [18:01] schestowitz > when I left, except to make a couple comments by email that you may [18:01] schestowitz > disagree with or dislike. By email. I didn't write an article saying [18:01] schestowitz > Fuck You, Techrights. Even my Fuck You, Roy article says Techrights [18:02] schestowitz > still has its good points. [18:02] schestowitz > [18:02] schestowitz > When you leave a cult, they talk a lot of shit about you when you leave, [18:02] schestowitz > for their own protection. That's really what this feels like, and the [18:02] schestowitz > feeling I'm responding to. I don't actually think TR is a cult, nor [18:02] schestowitz > cult-like. [18:02] schestowitz > [18:02] schestowitz > To put it impolitely, but without being unclear, you can simply leave me [18:02] schestowitz > the fuck out of things and I will gladly be on my way. Again, that isn't [18:02] schestowitz > a gag order to never mention me again-- that's not realistic in your [18:02] schestowitz > line of work. If it's news, it's news. Not that I think I'm that important. [18:02] schestowitz > [18:02] schestowitz > I still read the logs. I don't wish to stay. Don't poison the well on [18:02] schestowitz > the way out (Mincer is absolutely free to think I'm nuts, with the data [18:02] schestowitz > he has to work with I don't know how he would think otherwise. "i don't [18:02] schestowitz > understand him" is fucking *charitable* right now.) [18:02] schestowitz > [18:02] schestowitz > But cmon, look at Stallman a minute. This may sound REALLY unfair, but [18:02] schestowitz > it isn't at all. We get misunderstood, we have bad days-- this is not in [18:02] schestowitz > relation to what I just sent you, it's about the rest of it. [18:02] schestowitz > [18:02] schestowitz > If you aren't trying to sell me out and drag me through the mud, then [18:02] schestowitz > just don't do that, and I will be on my way. [18:02] schestowitz > [18:02] schestowitz > I have what I consider good reason to think you were doing so-- my [18:02] schestowitz > response is already in the logs and if you're really hellbent on doing [18:02] schestowitz > so you can publish it, but the only reason I wrote it was in [18:02] schestowitz > self-defence. If that self-defence isn't needed, then the article isn't [18:02] schestowitz > needed. Just don't drag me through the mud. [18:02] schestowitz > [18:02] schestowitz > Some people are simple enough to say "but you tried to"-- no, I only [18:02] schestowitz > talked about what was happening to me, and what I firmly believe it was [18:02] schestowitz > really about. I told one person I left, but I didn't say way, and I [18:02] schestowitz > didn't tell anybody else. [18:02] schestowitz > [18:02] schestowitz > It's sort of a circular argument, I admit-- but if you don't plan to [18:02] schestowitz > spend the next few weeks smearing me to gain the trust of these [18:02] schestowitz > so-called Stallman supporters, then I don't need to defend myself from [18:02] schestowitz > you abusing your position that way, do I? [18:02] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > The way I see it, the ball is in your court. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > But realise that I'm eager to put distance between us. Not so I can [18:03] schestowitz > cause you problems, or you can cause them for me. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > It's your choice, Roy. I'm sure that sounds either defiant or [18:03] schestowitz > unreasonable, but I encourage you to take it more literally and less [18:03] schestowitz > like I'm implying something other than exactly what I just said. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > It's your choice. Or as the license said: You just DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU [18:03] schestowitz > WANT TO. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > I hope the main point of this email gets across, which is that my [18:03] schestowitz > PREFERENCE is to leave you and Techrights the fuck alone, and I would [18:03] schestowitz > also like you to return the favour, within reason. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > Some people will surely read that and say "he's saying he will bother [18:03] schestowitz > you if"-- Roy, I'm already "bothering" you. You say you're looking for [18:03] schestowitz > "how to respond". It's not euphemistic when I say that if you're looking [18:03] schestowitz > for the best way to respond, the best way is to just leave me the fuck [18:03] schestowitz > alone. It's not me trying to intimidate a group of people larger than [18:03] schestowitz > myself when I say that I'd be *more than happy* to return the favour. [18:03] schestowitz > I'm not looking for war here, unless you're adamant about it. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > The point, of course, is that was my intention before-- to walk away, [18:03] schestowitz > and leave you alone. But I think you were being dishonest and unfair. [18:03] schestowitz > Was it unintentional? That's better. I *still* think it was dishonest [18:03] schestowitz > and unfair. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > I intend to be done here. I'd prefer sooner, rather than later. I really [18:03] schestowitz > hope that if you also prefer sooner, I've given you enough to go on that [18:03] schestowitz > you can simply leave me out of this. That works for me. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > Not interested in fighting Techrights, just interested in the door. If [18:03] schestowitz > you want to keep me around, give me something I really have to respond to. [18:03] schestowitz > [18:03] schestowitz > I'd rather just go, Roy. But you hold the cards, here. What do you want [18:03] schestowitz > to do? I'd rather you show it than tell me. Maybe I just think I've got [18:03] schestowitz > your number because I'm burnt out and tired. But Roy, neither of us [18:03] schestowitz > thinks I'm that stupid, do we? Whether I'm mistaken or not. [18:04] schestowitz > [18:04] schestowitz > Do WTF, like the license says. I don't want to talk about it, I just [18:04] schestowitz > want to go. It's been real. In the future if/when I criticise the fucked [18:04] schestowitz > up things the FSF does, I will do it somewhere else so you can say "He [18:04] schestowitz > doesn't even write guest articles for us anymore. He doesn't even talk [18:04] schestowitz > to us anymore". Everybody wins. [18:04] schestowitz > [18:04] schestowitz > https://genius.com/John-lennon-and-yoko-ono-happy-xmas-war-is-over-lyrics [18:04] -TechrightsBN/#boycottnovell-genius.com | JohnLennon & Yoko Ono Happy Xmas (War Is Over) Lyrics | Genius Lyrics ● Dec 22 [19:17] *rianne_ has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) [19:17] *liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) [19:24] *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell [19:25] *liberty_box (~liberty@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell ● Dec 22 [21:08] *Blakereeate has quit (K-Lined) ● Dec 22 [22:51] *rianne__ (~rianne@host81-154-173-106.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #boycottnovell [22:51] *rianne_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)