Re: address@hidden is premoderated

[Jean Louis]

* Dora Scilipoti <dora@gnu.org> [2019-10-30 04:37]:
> Hello,
> 
> almost five days after submitting my request for subscription, it was
> finally approved. And a few hours before the approval happened, the
> moderation rules were updated with yet more restrictions, and this
> particular point:
> 
> Tue, 29 Oct 2019 10:31:37 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > And for governance discussions, they should stay on topic and be about
> > governance. Discussions about individuals and their capabilities are
> > off topic.
> 
> What if I want to propose a governance model that includes someone as
> head of a committee, for example. Am I not allowed to name and talk
> about the qualities of the person I consider relevant for the position?

In regards to governance of GNU Project:

- there shall be one division that takes care of exact wordings of the
  founder, all of the articles of the free software philosophy,
  including how founder was running the project, write-up of his
  responsibilities and duties, that would be "Planning Department"
  within Executive Division. There shall be one person or group of
  persons responsible in that department and also independent of
  everybody else in the organization, independent financially, maybe
  financed or paid by the FSF or by one percentage of donations or one
  fixed fee -- but with authority to bring any other staff member or
  position in the organization on the good course of action, back to
  the original direction as written and planned by the founder.

  That could be an attorney or attorney office even. They would need
  to have full authority over those actions. Even them could be
  replaced if people loyal to free software philosophy object in a
  certain manner and petition them.

  Let's call this position "Stallman's Works" or "Philosophy Officer"

- then organization would need to be run in the same manner as it was
  run in successful manner in past. There could be chairman,
  presidents, staff members, etc. It does not matter. They would
  propose plans of actions, and they would adopt plans of
  actions. "Philosophy Officer" could strengthen such plans, or could
  object if they are not aligned with the philosophy.

  For example introduction of "open source" terminology should not be
  promoted on the main website. Even though individual contributors or
  maintainers are allowed to express their opinions as they wish. Not
  everybody need to be true to GNU Project "policies", but within the
  core organization, they shall remain true and promote it well.

  For example, if RMS was holding 50 speeches per year, such shall be
  continued, as that was successful action and "Philosophy Officer"
  would need to assign speeches to various people and also make sure
  that speakers give the message of free software philosophy, and not
  that they deviate in subjects like "which features of Windows or GNU
  are better or different to each other" -- as such subject would be
  contrary to free software philosophy, there is no alternative to
  proprietary software neither features are focus of the philsophy, we
  don't use proprietary software. Staying on purpose is important.

  RMS is handling community in very calm manner, he let people be most
  of time, that is not something that is written, but the manner of
  his handlings could be written down for the "Philosophy Officer" to
  understand and continue with it.

  RMS is opponent of censorship, when there was objection to the joke
  in glibc manual, and joke was about mainly about "Federal
  Censorship", which was construed as being "abort" joke, somebody
  proposed to censor the joke of the federal censorship. Unix and GNU
  and computing in general is accompanied of all kinds of jokes. The
  manner of handling a joke and insisting that it is brought back is
  also fight for the free speech and human rights. It is fight for
  what is right. That is one example, and such manner of handling
  issues (which is not written) is equally important in running the
  GNU organization just as the free software philosophy (which is
  written).

In general, there shall be a write-up of all duties, positions,
including contacts to organizations, and individuals which are
important allies, and such write up better be signed by GPG, and
published or accessible to those who are within the core
organization.

Jean