* Timo Weingärtner: " Re: "rms-open-letter" choice 3: do not, as the project
itself, sign any letter regarding rms" (Sat, 27 Mar 2021 11:51:40 +0100):
> Hallo Jonas,
>
> 26.03.21 20:42 Jonas Smedegaard:
> > Quoting Calum McConnell (2021-03-26 20:14:50)
> >
> > > > Any individual (including Debian members) wishing to (co-)sign any
> > > > of the open letters in question is invited to do this in person.
> > >
> > > "In person" is a bit unclear, given our times: can I sign it online?
> > > How about just adding my name?
> > >
> > > I propose switching it to:
> > > > Any individual (including Debian members) wishing to (co-)sign any
> > > > of the open letters on this subject is strongly encouraged to do so.
> > >
> > > It also handles the fact that the open letters aren't really 'in
> > > question', since there aren't any accepted amendments that mention
> > > them. I also switched out "invite", because I feel that 'invite'
> > > implies the ability to UN-invite (ie, block from signing), which is
> > > not one that we possess.
> >
> > I was assuming that "in person" meant "individually", but I can see how
> > it can instead mean "by showing up physically" which makes little sense
> > in the context.
> >
> > Replacing "in person" with either "personally" or "individually" or "on
> > their own" would in my opinion convey the same intended message as is my
> > understanding (as a non-native english speaker) is the message now, and
> > I would second proposal with such change.
> >
> > Removing "in person" would however loose what in my understanding is the
> > central point of the message and making the central point implicit,
> > causing it to risk becoming ambiguous (although I cannot think up right
> > now how any examples of how other meanings could be read into it). I
> > would hesitate seconding a proposal with the phrase removed.
> >
> > Replacing "invited to do this in person" with "strongly encouraged to do
> > so" would in my opinion radically change the message from an unbiased
> > "Debian does not recommend if you should personally support a petition
> > or not" to a biased "Debian recommends that you personally support a
> > petition". I would *not* second such changed proposal.
>
> I took "in a personal capacity" from Gunnar.
>
> > Replacing "in question" with "on this subject" seems to me to not change
> > to meaning of the message. I would second a proposed text with that
> > change.
>
> That's better actually, because it is not restricted to statements mentioned
> in the vote.
>
> Updated text:
> ---8<---8<---8<---
> The Debian Project will not issue a public statement on whether Richard
> Stallman should be removed from leadership positions or not.
>
> Any individual (including Debian members) wishing to (co-)sign any of the
> open letters on this subject is invited to do this in a personal capacity.
> ---8<---8<---8<---
Seconded.
--
Mathias Behrle
PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0xD6D09BE48405BBF6
AC29 7E5C 46B9 D0B6 1C71 7681 D6D0 9BE4 8405 BBF6
--
Mathias Behrle
PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0xD6D09BE48405BBF6
AC29 7E5C 46B9 D0B6 1C71 7681 D6D0 9BE4 8405 BBF6
Attachment:
pgpZMeqeHTJE5.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP