Re: Should we take steps to reduce russian access to Free Software?> the headache of it all dissolves in forgiveness

[gregor <gregor.podrzaj@riseup.net>]

hello,

thank you for taking the time for fencing my blabberings. tried as i 
could, it was best i could do (write)

what you are saying makes a lot of sense. i need to read it few times 
more (to let it sip through the thickness of my bone)

i didn't have the oportunity, have not received any mail from lib.plan 
since my agitated mail. but i did receive the one you've mentioned, by 
mr rms, well, the one where he nicely denies any charge (i was accusing 
Devins letter of). i read it  couple times, but couldn't come to 
differently judge Devins letter.

the book i go by, strongly condems judging other people and i am a bad 
personn for doing that to Devin. anti-war triggerhappy soldier that i 
am. i hope Devin can forgive me some day.

yes, as you've stated - i must have read way way too much into it. . if 
most of readers got the meanning you presented, then i am surelly wrong. 
and it would be backpedalling on my side trying with the cultural 
difference excuse.

backpaddle i shall not. apologise is a different thing.

i spoke my mind. my mind is wrong. am in the process of talking to my 
mind, to see weather go with what most people read in Devins letter or 
stay where i was - wrong.

again, thank you for taking the time

g

ps

i wrote the above, thinking your letter was sent to me only, now just 
about to send i see is for all, i will leave it as it is, sending it to all

On 2. 03. 22 07:18, Valentino Giudice wrote:
>> when Devin answers with: " 'what' the FSF ... ", that 'what' makes me
>> think that there is something going on
> Stop right there.
> Devin is only responsible for what he writes, not for what you think.
>
>> but then, is there the same amount of active engagemant on all the
>> other issues? and that is no trivial question, for there might be
>> monsanto using free software for spraying prohibited neonicotins,
> Which is something the FSF doesn't legally have to care about.
> But because there are US sanctions against Russia, the FSF, and any
> other US organization, has to comply.
>
>> ... and then we come to the problem of arbitrirary choosing as best as
>>   we can, out of zillion unjustices, which ones we will fight against.
> But the FSF is not fighting against this injustice. In fact, the FSF
> is not even claiming the ongoing situation is an injustice.
> The FSF is just "chosing" anything, it's just doing what it has to as
> a US organization.
>
>> so who will decide
> The US government. Do you think the FSF decided these sanctions?
>
>> so i wonder what would this selective active engagement in our case
>> mean.
> It means the FSF is complying with the law. It has to.
>
>> and i come to the conclusion, that it is a political stance.
> You came to the wrong conclusion.
>
>> the answer or
>> rather the lack of it, shows complete support of emotionally charged
>> jacobs opinion
> By the same logic, I could argue that unless the FSF expressly
> condemns the Russian government, it means it supports it.
> Would that make sense? Absolutely not, because this logic doesn't make sense.
> Not saying something doesn't equate saying the opposite. What would
> imply endorsement of what Jacob said is if Devin expressly endorsed
> it, which isn't what happened.
>
> While I was attempting to reply to your email, I will have to skip
> part of it. It's so badly written I can't even parse it. You should
> really put more effort in your writing.
>
>>   i
>> find it very rude to be calling civilians to go to war. i find it very
>> very rude to be coming from FSF.
> That literally never happened. The FSF never called for anyone to go to war.
>
>> or am i wrong?
> You are wrong.
> The FSF is only political when it comes to software freedom and
> related topics. The US government, however, *is* political and the FSF
> will comply with US law.
>
>> he is taking a
>> stand in a war which he is no part of.
> The stand is "we will literally follow the law, which we have to".
>
> None is recruiting soldiers, not on the FSF mailing list.
>
>
> Devin's "answer" effectively didn't answer Jacob's question at all.
> Some others did answer it, including Richard Stallman, a member of the
> board of directors of the FSF. And the consensus seems pretty clear to
> me: the answer to Jacob's question is NO.
>
> As Stallman has said, Devin's answer was incomplete. But he didn't say
> anything wrong. Unless you read way too much into it.

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss