Re: Re: Cancel "culture" is a threat to Debian
> It's supposed to represent everyone who fights for a future where software is open
Is it possible? To reopresent everyone.
Shouldn't he instead represent that he's expected to represent?
>From the fsf.org:
Our Core Work
The FSF maintains historic articles covering free software philosophy and
maintains the Free Software Definition - to show clearly what must be
true about a particular software program for it to be considered free software.
The FSF publishes the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL)
and so on.
Here is nothing about rms (or any FSF leader/board stuff/member) must
represent _you_. Or me, in turn.
> I mean not even the fr*cking FSFE knew about that
Why it should? Different organization.
> And there was no apology from RMS
There was no apology from RMS "critics", which e.g. improperly quote RMS
in the case of Minsky "defence" (the blame was itself is a lie).
> We as a project that believes that diversity and democracy
You place your political opinion for members of the project, which even
can't vote. Is this a democracy?
> Obviously, everyone is free to disagree and can sign the support letter.
> There is no problem
See above. That's not a problem for you, yes.