(ℹ) Join us now at the IRC channel | ䷉ Find the plain text version at this address.
| *liberty_box has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) | Apr 22 01:50 | |
| *rianne_ has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) | Apr 22 01:50 | |
| *rianne_ (~rianne@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #techbytes | Apr 22 02:18 | |
| *liberty_box (~liberty@host81-154-169-167.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) has joined #techbytes | Apr 22 02:19 | |
| *genr8_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection) | Apr 22 03:48 | |
| *genr8_ (~genr8_@unaffiliated/genbtc) has joined #techbytes | Apr 22 05:26 | |
| schestowitz | >>> I am going to give that a go tonight, catching up with the weird attack | Apr 22 06:38 |
|---|---|---|
| schestowitz | >>> on the DB at the moment. | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | >> The server password for Mumble is 'xxxxx'. | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | > OK, it seems to be working now, but what happened to ytalk? | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | I have been disabling parts of the site since yesterday, taking note of areas and requests that take up lots of CPU power and are likely targeted. | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | Regarding ytalk, last update seen at my end was "network maintenance"; I think it was like 3 days ago. | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | Mumble connects OK, I can test that later when nobody here is asleep. | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | Regarding TM, it's a bit like cat and mouse... but we'll cope. Maybe we're targeted as (AFAIK) we're the biggest site of this kind. | Apr 22 06:38 |
| schestowitz | Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > * Andreas R. <avr@softwarelibre.nl> [2021-04-21 09:39]: | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | >> In this mail I try to provide an overview of the "GNU Assembly" | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | >> initiative in relation to the GNU project. | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > Do you represent the "anti-GNU Assembly"? | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > Was the "anti-GNU Assembly" approved by GNU project? | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > Sorry, I see that as incitement to split the GNU project. This group | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > of people wish to say they represent the whole GNU project and they | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > present themselves as speakers for GNU project. | Apr 22 09:19 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > It is clear that their activities have not been coordinated with RMS, | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > and it is also clear from the list of people that they belong to | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > defamatory group of people. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > People who are in conflict over their own good deeds, their | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > contributions to GNU project, their former respect and admiration to | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > RMS, and their later disloyalty and defamation of the founder. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > Surely, they (like children) seek to have a group similar like a | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > family as "how it was" and they need to gather together. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > However, those are personal problems, unrelated to GNU project. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > It is not quite just and fair to call it "GNU Assembly" neither "anti-GNU | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > Maintainers" as they do not represent the whole GNU project neither | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > all numbers of maintainers. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > People are free to organize how they wish and want. But we have some | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > unspoken social agreements and also legal agreements. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > This domain gnu.tools and "Gatherung under New Umbrella" and Code of | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > Conduct for GNU are disrespectful attempt to take over the main GNU | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > project. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > Do you understand how many protests and pointers will be there? People | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > will be writing on their pages and websites and will be protesting. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > This is causing division, protests, disagreements. | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > When some of those people is personally disgruntled why they need to | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > tear community apart with their personal issues? | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | >> - The main page, https://gnu.tools/, states: | Apr 22 09:20 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-gnu.tools | The GNU Assembly — The GNU Assembly | Apr 22 09:20 | |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | >> "Welcome to the GNU Assembly!" | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | >> Currently the Assembly consists of GNU maintainers. As such using "GNU" | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | >> as part of "GNU assembly" is not misleading or inappropriate. They are a | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | >> subset of GNU, and distinguish themselves from the larger GNU project by the | Apr 22 09:20 |
| schestowitz | >> distinct qualifier "Assembly". | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> "We write free software" where "free software" links to | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> https://gnu.tools/en/documents/free-software/ | Apr 22 09:21 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-gnu.tools | The GNU Assembly — Free software | Apr 22 09:21 | |
| schestowitz | > IMHO, their definition is clearly infringing on FSF copyrights as they | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > have taken it from: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html | Apr 22 09:21 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.gnu.org | What is free software? - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation | Apr 22 09:21 | |
| schestowitz | > whereby the page is licensed under Copyright © 1996, 2002, 2004-2007, | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > 2009-2019, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc. -- Creative Commons | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License; and where they | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > have made a derivative. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > They say: "The GNU Assembly produces free software — also referred to | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > as “libre software”, “liberating software”, or “open source” -- and | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > further they say "These criteria were spelled out by Richard | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > M. Stallman in the 1980s" -- which is incorrect, as Stallman never | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > used "Open Source" -- it is clear misrepresentation of free software | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > philosophy. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > It is obvious that they do not support GNU project. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > It is obvious that they want to use "GNU" as a trademark which does | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > not belong to them. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4808:iwpwdz.2.17 | Apr 22 09:21 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-tmsearch.uspto.gov | TESS -- Error | Apr 22 09:21 | |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> As far as I can tell, their definition of "free software", other than their off-by-one | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> numbering is in line with the official definition at | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > The above hyperlink is not on their website. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > They did not hyperlink once to GNU project. That is splinter group | Apr 22 09:21 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.gnu.org | What is free software? - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation | Apr 22 09:21 | |
| schestowitz | > that deviates definitions because they are in disagreements. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> Their definition is less complete, but seems to contain no | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | >> contradictions or misleading information. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > It is not so. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > Now they even mention "open source" with a footnote how it does not | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > convey meaning of the freedom. | Apr 22 09:21 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > GNU project never mentions "open source" in such context. | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> "Here’s what “GNU” means to us:" | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> The bulk of the main page is a set of novelty "backronyms" of GNU to illustrate | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> their purpose, none of which are in direct conflict with the actual GNU | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> project. They, as much as anyone, should be free to fill in what the GNU | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> project means to them and use and contribute to it as they see fit, even | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> as a self-defined exclusive club. | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > That is not so. GNU project is on https://www.gnu.org -- and that is | Apr 22 09:22 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.gnu.org | The GNU Operating System and the Free Software Movement | Apr 22 09:22 | |
| schestowitz | > group of people among larger group of people that have contributed to | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > GNU project; however, they are not defining the GNU project. | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > GNU project we have to understand it, is private project of RMS, | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > supported and could be protected by the FSF, with the independent | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > management of FSF. | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > GNU project is not on gnu.tools neither on any of other gnu-related | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > domains, it is just on www.gnu.org | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> The main page includes a link, under "Governance, Not Unilateralism": | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> -https://gnu.tools/en/documents/social-contract/ | Apr 22 09:22 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-gnu.tools | The GNU Assembly — GNU Social Contract 1.0 | Apr 22 09:22 | |
| schestowitz | > Of course that is a reference to their disagreements to GNU project. | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > However, nobody forbid them develop free software and contribute to | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > each other. | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > Their misrepresentation and disrespect however cannot have positive | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > impact on community. | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> "GNU Social Contract 1.0" | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> This is clearly erroneous as there is no such thing as a "GNU Social Contract". | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> This would be trivial to fix by renaming it to "GNU Assembly Social | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> contract", but given its history it's unlikely that those who drafted it | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | >> would be willing to amend it. | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > I don't think it is proper to name it "GNU Assembly" whatever for | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > reasons that they misrepresent GNU project. But it is proper to say | Apr 22 09:22 |
| schestowitz | > "anti-GNU Assembly", as that would define their purposes better. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > As there is no singly hyperlink to official GNU project, it is clear | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > that this is shameful splinter group. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | >> Even though the GNU project has no code of conduct, it should be okay | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | >> for any self organising subgroup of GNU maintainers to adopt one. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > Yes, people are free to organize. I do not speak of their | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > organization, rather of misrepresentation of the official GNU | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > project. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > They have their projects, nobody forbid them to advertise their | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > projects, organize themselves. Their misrepresentation is what is | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > problem. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | >> As far as I can tell, there are no references or indications that | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | >> this document would apply to anything or anyone outside of the | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | >> Assembly. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > Their generalization and lack of references to official GNU project | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > represents fraudulent misrepresentation of the official GNU project. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > Those GNU projects often receive donations. GNU Guix received quite a | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > lot of donations. Right? Those are financial interests. Be it of | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > social or humanitarian nature, those are financial interests. Groups | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > and organizations may have financial interests, regardless, even if | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > not considered as individuals. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > Donors can claim in their court damages if they feel betrayed by | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > fraudulent misrepresentation, as representation was made, it was | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > false, this group of people know it is false, their intention is for | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > public to rely on them, donors may rely on them, donors may be related | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > to their politics of cancel culture, feminism, social justice | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > warriors, you name it -- and suffer harm such as harm of the public | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > image, or loss of their jobs, contracts or other harm. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > Further, the trust in the software developers is divided this way. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > GNU project has policy not to involve any other politics but free | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > software politics. These people do not have such policy. They are | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > group that support cancel culture. | Apr 22 09:23 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> From their mailing list: | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> There are some mentions of "the former GNU project" and "old GNU" by | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> individual members of the list, but these might be slightly provocative | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> ways distinguish between their initiative and the GNU project as a whole. | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> https://lists.gnu.tools/hyperkitty/list/assembly@lists.gnu.tools/thread/3PDVUTCKG33R3KY7XCV5TKQUMIW5NMWC/ | Apr 22 09:24 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-lists.gnu.tools | thoughts for when we get to the details of governance - Assembly - lists.gnu.tools | Apr 22 09:24 | |
| schestowitz | >> https://lists.gnu.tools/hyperkitty/list/assembly@lists.gnu.tools/thread/JUBZSTVY2LLSXDPKOMOSQBN7VYJ6JN5G/ | Apr 22 09:24 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-lists.gnu.tools | New assembly member - Assembly - lists.gnu.tools | Apr 22 09:24 | |
| schestowitz | > Nobody forbids these people to use their own name of the group, to | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > make heir own project, nobody. | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > What they do however, is they are using recklessly the trademark GNU | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > to misrepresent the official GNU project, thus deceiving the public; | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > their intention is malicious take over of the organization that they | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > do not govern and of course money. | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> There are however other claims of direct usurpation of the GNU Project on their | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> mailing list, such as: "by creating this assembly, we affirmed that GNU | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> Project leadership is in our hands, collectively, as maintainers and contributors to GNU." | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> https://lists.gnu.tools/hyperkitty/list/assembly@lists.gnu.tools/thread/SMFKD7M34VUTUW45MSO4UOWL4C7V5FQT/ | Apr 22 09:24 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-lists.gnu.tools | The assembly’s position - Assembly - lists.gnu.tools | Apr 22 09:24 | |
| schestowitz | > Ludovic Courtès (Guix) is accusing Stallman of Thoughtcrime on his own domain GNU.org: | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Ludovic-Courtès-Guix-is-accusing-Stallman-of-Thoughtcrime-on-his-own-domain-GNU-org.html | Apr 22 09:24 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-gnu.support | Ludovic Courtès (Guix) is accusing Stallman of Thoughtcrime on his own domain GNU.org | Apr 22 09:24 | |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > Nothing new from him. | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > He knows programming, he suffers as social integrator, all what he | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > knows is how to divide community. | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > But I like Guix, however, Ludovic Courtès is and never will be GNU, | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > neither the GNU project leader, maybe anti-GNU project leader. I am | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > sorry for that guy. Some people have high intellect lacking however | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > social skills. | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > By inciting people to public harassment and illegal take-over of | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > established projects I consider Ludovic Courtès a straight criminal. | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> As things are, holding beliefs about what a certain things constitute | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | >> doesn't conflict with the GNU project. | Apr 22 09:24 |
| schestowitz | > If they would be using other name, I don't know how it would conflict. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > But GNU Guix would never receive all the donations would they not be | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > under the FSF and GNU umbrella. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > If they do not use the word GNU, they would lose support. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > That is why they want "GNU" in the name, because they are not strong | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > enough to sustain their efforts without GNU, or maybe it is just a new | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > psychopatic attempt to destroy FSF and GNU. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> To clarify, if someone declares their house to be the newly founded | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> dutchy of X, and themselves royalty, but abides by every law of the | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> land and only adds stipulations that do not contravene existing | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> regulations (e.g. every visitor to the kingdom of X must wear a | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> silly hat), that is certainly odd, but should be no ground for the | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> proper authorities to intervene or curtail their freedom of claiming | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> it is so. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > Not so, we are society that is intertwined in various agreements. For | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > example when free software definition is published it is published | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > under specific license, they cannot go around changing the text as it | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > was not allowed in the first place by the license, thus all of them | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > are now infringing on the copyrights of the FSF, and they cannot just | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > publish it without contribution, license is clear and should be | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > respected. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > They cannot misrepresent other organization or project, neither they | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > are allowed to use the GNU trademark improperly. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> There is also a proposal for inviting new software projects to the GNU project. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> https://lists.gnu.tools/hyperkitty/list/assembly@lists.gnu.tools/thread/QDYJKAVUKI3LS42AWWBSJXE34ANECRNO/ | Apr 22 09:25 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-lists.gnu.tools | inviting projects to be GNU projects - Assembly - lists.gnu.tools | Apr 22 09:25 | |
| schestowitz | >> | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> This would be a direct violation of the GNU Project's integrity. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > They are free to invite software projects, why not, but not to call it | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > GNU project. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > I just see it as a bunch of immature people. | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> Much as the EU parliament is able to accommodate and harbour an | Apr 22 09:25 |
| schestowitz | >> "anti-EU" faction, there is no real reason, at this moment, for the GNU | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | >> Project to disavow or even undertake any action against the Assembly or | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | >> its members. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > If they would call it anti-GNU it would be more clear. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > They call themselves GNU because of their own broken integrity, they | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > love GNU, but not the father of GNU because they spoke lies against | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > the founder and they just want to justify it, as they are good people | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > indeed. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > However, that they are good inside that does not justify the real harm | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > in free software community, as that is their creation since 2019. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | >> -to monitor if the Assembly will add new software to the GNU Project | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | >> outside of the normal procedures and channels, and, if needed, | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | >> inform the writers of the software that they are being misled. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > Everybody is free to invite software projects to any organization, | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > like to GNU project, or to defamatory group's project. Nobody object | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > on that. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > But what is not right is their fraudulent misrepresentation, illegal | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > activities, infringment of FSF copyrights on free software philosophy, | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > and hostile takeover of FSF/GNU. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > We have to clearly say that they they are anti-GNU and that they do | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > not represent neither GNU project nor FSF as to protect the FSF's | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > status as non-profit corporation. Their political statements don't | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > conform to non-profit laws and rules. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > There are few facts to mention: | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > 1. RMS did nothing illegal; GNU project is not theirs; | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > 2. FSF did nothing illegal and is properly applying the funds for its | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > non-profit purposes, they also have public financial statements; | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | > The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès on https://gnu.tools | Apr 22 09:26 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-gnu.tools | The GNU Assembly — The GNU Assembly | Apr 22 09:26 | |
| schestowitz | > is infringing on the legal rights and purposes of the GNU/FSF. | Apr 22 09:26 |
| schestowitz | LOL: https://www.linux.org.ru/photos/175670:1038770189.png | Apr 22 14:00 |
| schestowitz | [14:00] <schestowitz> see http://techrights.org/2021/03/28/ibm-and-rms-incompatible/ | Apr 22 14:00 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | IBM and RMS Are Not Compatible | Techrights | Apr 22 14:00 | |
| *asusbox has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) | Apr 22 16:18 | |
| *rianne__ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat) | Apr 22 16:18 | |
| *asusbox (~rianne@2a00:23c4:c3aa:7d01:8b5:7:8cf4:58d) has joined #techbytes | Apr 22 16:20 | |
| *rianne (~rianne@2a00:23c4:c3aa:7d01:8b5:7:8cf4:58d) has joined #techbytes | Apr 22 16:20 | |
| *Condor (~freenode@e1.nixmagic.com) has joined #techbytes | Apr 22 18:44 | |
| *Condor_ has quit (*.net *.split) | Apr 22 18:48 | |
| schestowitz | x https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2021/04/21/unwto-and-facebook-leverage-digital-marketing-to-restart-tourism/ | Apr 22 19:43 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-moderndiplomacy.eu | UNWTO and Facebook: Leverage Digital Marketing to Restart Tourism - Modern Diplomacy | Apr 22 19:43 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 | ䷉ find the plain text version at this address.
