From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcin Borkowski Subject: Discussion of non-free-as-defined-by-FSF software (was: [ANN] [OT] New Android app (Orgzly)) Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 00:57:51 +0100 Message-ID: <87sif1gidc.fsf@wmi.amu.edu.pl> References: <87lhkvm4nb.fsf@orgzly.com> <87fvb222ft.fsf@gnu.org> <87a91aiie1.fsf@wmi.amu.edu.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53942) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YEo77-0006bm-7O for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:58:11 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YEo73-0005Ta-6V for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:58:09 -0500 Received: from msg.wmi.amu.edu.pl ([2001:808:114:2::50]:54414) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YEo72-0005TR-Qr for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:58:05 -0500 In-reply-to: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Neven *NOTE* This email contains a strong opinion about a certain three-letter organization. If you have a problem with that, you can stop reading right about now. ;-) On 2015-01-23, at 20:18, Greg Troxel wrote: > Marcin Borkowski writes: > >> On 2015-01-22, at 17:41, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: >> >>> *NOTE* It's about an app which is *not* open source (some parts o= f code >>> will opened, see below). If you have a problem with that, you ca= n stop >>> reading right about now... >>> >>> Please stop using the GNU mailing lists to promote proprietary softwa= re. >> >> It might be the case that I do not understand something. >> >> AFAIR, there was a recent discussion on another GNU mailing list about >> usability of Emacs under Windows. (Maybe it was somewhere else, I'm n= ot >> sure, then my question is theoretical.) A few people claimed that Ema= cs >> under Windows is fully functional and works well. Would this also be >> considered "promoting proprietary software"? > > The point here is that the FSF is a charitable nonprofit which promotes > free software. Their servers have usage guidelines: > > https://savannah.gnu.org/register/requirements.php > > Basically, helping Free software to work on non-Free operating systems > is ok, as long as the non-Free OS is not the proprietary target and the > software works best (or equal) on Free systems. Supporting or > advertising non-Free software is not ok. > > So the opinions of our hosts are pretty clear. 1. I see, it is indeed pretty clear. I did not know that, and I am thankful that you pointed it out. (In particular, this seems to more or less answer my questions.) Incidentally, it makes me satisfied that I decided not to sign the FSF copyright papers: I do not want to be formally involved in any way with this organization (for instance, I do not want them to have any piece of paper with my personal signature, nor would I buy any book from them knowing that this way I would support them with my money). 2. I would also prefer people here to express information about the rules which might not be known to e.g. anybody who learned about list from the Org-mode site and did not want to spend time on the FSF website with similarly factual way as you (and let me make this very clear: I again thank you for that, even if we do disagree), not with hostility toward a person who (like me, and apparently other people) does not treat software as religion and does not consider non-free (as defined by RMS) software necessary immoral. (And that's good for me, personally: if I were to treat software as religion, I might consider switching to Vim at this very moment, and it would be a nuisance, since I both am not accustomed to it and consider it technically inferior to Emacs. The current situation also makes me uncomfortable: I did recommend Emacs to many people, sometimes successfully, and from now on I'm going to consider it my moral obligation to state clearly that when advertising Emacs, I do not endorse any opinions of RMS or FSF =E2=80=93 indeed, I wo= uld rather warn people not to listen to them, or rather: to listen to them while carefully judging what they hear.) 3. I would like to know where on the Internet I could discuss Org-related topics in a free (=E2=80=9Cfree as in freedom=E2=80=9D, to qu= ote RMS once again) way, since clearly (and ironically, I'm inclined to add) this is not possible on any mailing list hosted by the FSF. Please note: I do not consider freedom of speech an absolute value, and I do not consider censorship necessarily immoral. My criticism of the FSF is not that they effectively endorse censorship of some kind; I'm fine with that, it is their servers after all, they are the hosts and they write the rules. (Although I find it a bit hypocritical that at the same time they apparently deny programmers the somehow analogous right to license the code they wrote using some non-FSF-approved license.) My problem with the FSF is that they represent and spread false moral views, and this is something harmful. (Even though I *do* agree with the FSF about many things, e.g., many of the remarks on their "words to avoid" page are definitely worth spreading. OTOH, I am not convinced that free software is necessarily the right answer to the problem they fight). Regards, --=20 Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Adam Mickiewicz University