esp] Pienso que algunos no han visto algo que dice este correo de David Sugar (un speaker oficial de la fsf, y por eso su relacion directa con rms - David es autor de gnubayonne entre otras cosas). Mando esto con copia a David asi el puede decir mas. (otra aclaracion, quien hablo con rms para venir a Argentina fui yo (Juan Carlos Gentile) en Turin Italia, donde estaba presente tambien Marco, Puria y otros y fue en el Politecnico de Turin en ocasion de una charla de rms ahi) Aqui lo interesante en ingles (y donde hay pruebas del sabotage) y despues una traduccion: [english mainly for David] I think that some didn't see in something that David Sugar (official speaker of fsf, and that explains his direct relationship with rms - David is creator of gnubayonne). I cc David, then he can tell more. (aclaration, who spoke to rms to come to Argentina was me (Juan Carlos Gentile) in Turin (Italy), in this ocassion Marco, Puria and others were present and was at the Turin Politecnico in ocassion of a rms speech there). [esp] Aqui lo interesante en ingles (y donde hay pruebas del sabotage) y despues una traduccion: [ingles] Here the interesting thing in english (where are the sabotage proofs) and then a spanish translation. [ingles] "First, the source of this conflict really goes to Richard's refusal to speak at the Madres University, an act I happen to feel was a national insult. This happened because Federico Heinz convinced him, as Richard said to me directly, that the Madres University teaches radicals and terrorist ideas, and spoke in active support of the 9/11 attack on the U.S. These were the things Richard told me Heinz said that convinced him not to speak at Madres. I do fully trust what Richard told me on this." [esp] "Primero, la razon de este conflicto es el rehuso de Richard de hablar en la Universidad de las Madres, un acto que creo que es un insulto nacional. Esto sucedio porque federico heinz lo convencio, como Richard me dijo directamente, que en la Universidad de las Madres se enseñan ideas terroristas y radicales, y se habla de un soporte activo al atauqe del 9/11 en USA. Estas son cosas que me dijo Richard heinz le habia dicho para convencerlo de no hablar en las Madres. Yo confio ciegamente en lo que Richard me dijo" Aqui dejo el mensaje inicial mandado el 22 de marzo como ven y que no lo leyeron bien, o dejaron pasar por alto cosas importantes como ese paragrafo que terminaria la discusion: ---------- Mensaje reenviado ---------- Subject: [Solar-general] Carta de David Sugar a SOLAR con relacion a Heinz. Date: Miércoles 22 Marzo 2006 17:25 From: "Diego Saravia" <[email protected]> To: "La lista de todos y todas en solar" <[email protected]> Acabo de recibir un pedido de David Sugar para que reenvie este mail a SOLAR Date: Miércoles 22 Marzo 2006 18:51 From: David Sugar <[email protected]> To: [email protected] I see Federico Heinz has written to the Directors of Solar about Madres, and Pablo Napoli about Stefano's banishment from the list. As I witnessed this event, I thought it was only appropriate that I respond, in that what Federico Heinz and Napoli wrote are in fact a fabrication. First, the source of this conflict really goes to Richard's refusal to speak at the Madres University, an act I happen to feel was a national insult. This happened because Federico Heinz convinced him, as Richard said to me directly, that the Madres University teaches radicals and terrorist ideas, and spoke in active support of the 9/11 attack on the U.S. These were the things Richard told me Heinz said that convinced him not to speak at Madres. I do fully trust what Richard told me on this. Second, we come to the matter of Stefano's expulsion from fg list. The original list, which was an international coordination list, had become divided, in large part over the consequences of Richard's action on behalf of Heinz. Nobody would agree to any common ground between the two parties. This was in large part because, as Claudia Acuna had said, Heinz had acted unethically in sabotaging talk at Madres, and because Heinz chose to activily sabotage other events as well. Stefano was the only person who tried, very hard, to bring these two groups together and at least agree on common rules and for the fsfla to agree to stop sabotaging events of other groups. Heinz on behalf of the fsfla consistently refused to agree to even this limited level of cooreration, and so the other group found it impossible to trust him at all, and no agreements were ever made. At one point in the middle of this, Heinz had the FSF create for fsfla a new, moderated list, appearently (since no reason was stated or given why this was done) so that they could censor disagreements. Stefano created a parallel list, I think the next day, which had no censorship, and hence was free as in speech. I think it was a week or two later when Stefano was banished. There had been no prior discussion whatsoever or reason given at the time. A little later, Oliva came up with this made up story, that Federico now repeats, that people on the list came together, voted or in some way agreed to some rules, and Stefano had violated them. I have seen every message on the list prior and after, and this in fact never happened. Maybe in secret some members of the list made some agreement, but if so, it was not known to anyone publically. And given that Stefano was the person most trying to get some common agreement on rules of behavior, I find this a particularly offensive and unforgivable lie by, what Claudia Acuna recently said, are fundimentally unethical people. Richard gave a completely different explanation to Stefeno when he met him in Turin last week. Richard said this was done because Stefano's public list could have public archives. Around the same time Oliva wrote a new story about how he did not want his words copied into public from a list without his expressed permission because they were his copyrighted thoughts among other things. I would be happy to do this from my mailbox from the list in question if anyone wishes to see what this person choses to say in private that is so secret. This story made some people from the original list upset because, of course, they never agreed to this and thought it was rediculous. I guess this is why Federico Heinz has chosen to return to the original lie that Oliva tried to sell. Personally I think what Richard said is closest to the truth; that it was a matter of control; that is; they did not have control over Stefano's list. If so that is rather sad and pathetic. The other reason might be because Stefano had tried so hard to do the one thing they claim happened which never did; some agreement on common rules. Hence, the best way to sabotage such an effort would be to remove him. I still do not know what the real reason was, but I do know I cannot trust a word such an unethical person says. It is great, I suppose for Oliva, and now Napoli, to be able to make things up after the fact from a list that after all was kept from full public. Perhaps it is time that archives of the lists became accessible, so that people can then see for themselves... Stated and Undersigned... David Sugar, GNU Project and GNU Telephony -- Diego Saravia [email protected] NO FUNCIONA->[email protected] _______________________________________________ Solar-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/solar-general -------------------------------------------------------