On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:50:37PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote: > I'm not sure I like this. I believe that removing the board is a > critical part of the letter. They are 4 friends that RMS chooses that he > chose because they never appose him. They are not elected by members of > the FSF but a self-selected cabal. As one of the first signers, but speaking solely for myself, I can confirm that recalling the entire board was for me a critical part of the letter. The rationale being that reinstating him shows a severe lack of judgment on the part of the board (technically: on the voting members, but that's an implementation detail which I thought would be lost on 99% of the letter readership and hence was in favor to leave out) and institutional failure, which cannot be cured by simply undoing the decision. (Of course a statement by the Debian project, in there is going to be one, can take a different stance.) > I'm not sure what the plans would be if the board would actually resign, > clearly RMS and the board have no intention of doing so[1] (at least by > their choice of language in that announcement), but ideally the board > would be selected by the community and be held accountable by them, > currently they answer to no one and let RMS do whatever he feels like > without consequences. For the record, there are successful examples of non-profit orgs going through major organizational reform via mass resignation + appointment of brand new board. The case of the Tor project [1] is probably one that would be familiar with many of us. [1]: https://blog.torproject.org/tor-project-elects-new-board-directors Cheers -- Stefano Zacchiroli . zack@upsilon.cc . upsilon.cc/zack . . o . . . o . o Computer Science Professor . CTO Software Heritage . . . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader & OSI Board Director . . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature