Re: On the good neutrality of free software

[quiliro]

"Lorenzo L. Ancora" via <directory-discuss@gnu.org> writes:
> If an FSD administrator wants to reject a software he/she must also
> add a valid motivation in the edit summary and that means explaining
> the specific reason for deletion. Nobody's going to reject a software
> on suspicion, approval can be delayed but at the end the FSD only
> approves edits based on facts (and this is a good thing for everyone).

Here is my view about this ordeal.  Please consider it in order to
continue in a productive way.

There is no such uniquely definition of the word _fact_ unless it is on
the terms of all the parties involved, and not even then.  This whole
discussion is based on the assumption that the definitions of one person
should be accepted by the rest.  It would be more productive to
establish acceptance of the other people's definitions without adopting
them.  Then we could create consensus on what is each definition on
common terms.  Only after that, we can propose what to do to others.
Telling others what to do is certainly not a productive to anyone.  Or
is it?

Something additional to consider is that logical positions are merely
justifications for previously underlying feelings pushing towards a
certain attitude.  That is the way the unconscious works according to
psychologists.

Warm greetings,

Quiliro