Sam Hartman wrote:
> 1) You said that Debian would not have an
> official presence on a proprietary social
> network. I think that as a statement of current
> political reality that's probably true.
> I don't think there are any policy impediments
> to doing so though, and I note that even the
> FSF does have a twitter presence (with
> reservations).
The FSF is lax when it comes to freedom. The Debian Project had to remind them that the GNU FDL is proprietary. The FSF follows the thought "it's okay when we do it." I think it's very beneficial for the use and prosperity of Free Software that there is with the Debian Project a second strong organization besides the GNU Project.
The Debian Project is already leading the way in regards of separating the parts of Linux which are compliant with the GNU GPL v2 and the parts which are proprietary. Years later the GNU Project does the same.
Today it's normal to have an account on Twitter if you haven't been banned yet. So I wouldn't protest if the Debian Project had one, too. But I can see the sound reasoning behind a policy that forbids to join proprietary platforms. By participation we would send the signal that it's okay to use it and strengthen the user lock in as "everybody is on Twitter."