[Solar-general] (mas jugo :)[Fwd: [Team] “peace agreement” with SOLAR, Vía Libre, FSFs?]]

Sab Ago 1 02:42:49 CEST 2009

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 09:03:26PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Gracias por compartir, muy interesante la discusión ;-)
> 

Bueno, dejate de agaradecerme. Parece una estrategia mas que un
agradecimiento.

De todos modos, por lo que aqui dice, tu has comprado espejos.
Para comprar espejos alguien tiene que vender espejos

O como con las palabras de Diego, estas nadando en la mugre.
Hasta que sigas en ese charco, se te vera sucio.

A esta altura te queda solo salir y enjabonarte.
y tal vez asi recuperaras tu piel tersa y suave de a.oliva.

No creo que rms con sus respuestas tu con tus escrituras actuaran de
jabon.

La frase de rms donde dice de "ignorar a menos que muchos ...." no
muestra un rms tan limpio.

z/j

> Sin embargo, hace falta éste correo.  ¿Quizás no te lo han enviado?
> 

> To: rms en gnu.org
> Cc: team en fsfla.org
> Subject: Re: [Team] “peace agreement” with
> 	SOLAR, Vía Libre, FSFs?
> From: Alexandre Oliva <lxoliva en fsfla.org>
> Organization: Free thinker, not speaking for FSF Latin America
> 
> On Jul 30, 2009, Alexandre Oliva <lxoliva en fsfla.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Jul 30, 2009, Richard Stallman <rms en gnu.org> wrote:
> >> They assume continuity which I personally dispute.  How can we be held
> >> responsible and be required to make up for things that were done before
> >> we existed, before any of the current members joined the organization?
> >> Even more so when all the records of  FSF de los Pampas  were erased,
> >> and we effectively started from scratch in December 2006.
> 
> >> Perhaps they do not realize that FSF LA effectively started from
> >> scratch in December 2006.
> 
> > It seems very insane to me, but they seem quite set on that line of
> > reasoning.
> 
> Turns out it actually makes sense :-(
> 
> See, we haven't actually changed much of our site.  The same documents
> published back then are still there, and quite prominent while at that.
> The initial declaration of intent, the mission, the goals drafted by the
> first organization, newsletters and all.
> 
> That's because we made a decision back then to avoid the impression of
> discontinuity.
> 
> With all this, any external observer, without the benefit of our
> knowledge about what happened, might reasonably arrive at the same
> conclusion.  Heck, even our announcements say we started in 2005!  We
> can't have it both ways.
> 
> 
> Now, most external observers, without all the baggage that they carry,
> might take a “oh, right, we made this decision, it seemed to make sense
> then, but we didn't know about all this baggage; can we please leave it
> behind?” at face value and leave it at that.
> 
> But they've grown so suspicious and distrustful that they don't believe
> it, and they seem to take it as some kind of trick, to fool them again.
> It's perfectly understandable.
> 
> So they demand some public declaration in which we repudiate our past
> and declare that we started anew back then.  Diego suggested:
> 
>  "En el 2006 empezo una nueva etapa en la FSFLA y los actuales miembros
>   repudiamos los hechos que dieron lugar a la anterior FSFLA, nos
>   comprometemos a nunca mas promover exclusiones de algun tipo en la
>   difusion del soft libre en america latina y a poner nuestro esfuerzo
>   en la recuperacion del daño causado esperando con ello, entre otras
>   cosas limpiar nuestro nombre".
> 
> This wording makes me a bit uncomfortable, but there's nothing in it
> that I particularly disagree with it:
> 
> - It is true that we started afresh then.
> 
> - It is true that we set ourselves aside from earlier acts; heck, we
>   don't even know about most of them
> 
> - We're not in the business of excluding; when people are promoting
>   Software Freedom, they're helping us advance our mission.  However,
>   this has to be worded very carefully to avoid setting up a trap for
>   ourselves, that someone could later use to get us to do or not do
>   things we ought to.
> 
> - It's not clear how much effort would be involved in repairing the
>   damage, so this might be overcommitment.  Watch out for traps.
> 
> - I don't like the fact that there's a need to clean up our name, but it
>   is hard to believe that it's not there, so we might as well do
>   something about it, or resign ourselves to its remaining there.
> 
> Regardless, perhaps we need to renew our web site so as to reflect what
> we are today.  I'm not suggesting that we remove or hide our history,
> but rather that we write down the chapters that followed, so that we
> don't present such outdated snapshots as if they were current.
> 
> -- 
> Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter    http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
> You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
> Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/   FSF Latin America board member
> Free Software Evangelist      Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer