Re: Links to javascript-based websites from orgmode.org: Paypal and Github

[Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com>]

Tom Gillespie <tgbugs@gmail.com> writes:

>> GNU packages should not steer people towards running nonfree software.
>> As a consequence, they should not suggest people donate using payment services
>> that _require_ the donor to run a nonfree program.
>
> A slight variant of Ihor's question.
>
> While GNU packages should not steer people toward nonfree software,
> I assume that there is nothing that prohibits GNU contributors from
> accepting donations via non-free systems.
>
> This thread suggests that it is no other option if devs also do not want
> to steer people toward cryptocurrencies (which some consider to be as
> ethically important as not steering people toward nonfree software).
>
> My question is whether the website for a GNU package can include links
> to the websites of individual developers with a note that you can provide
> financial support to the project by supporting individuals. In the end the
> user still winds up using nonfree JS, but is GNU living up to its principles
> by virtue of the extra layer of indirection?
>
> Given that https://www.fsf.org/about/ways-to-donate/ does include paypal
> as an option, with a disclaimer, is a disclaimer not a sufficient solution for
> GNU packages as well?

Given that the FSF has a link to PayPal on their donations page , I
think we can do the same for the org project. All that is required is
that we do like the FSF does and put a bit of text beside it stating
"Not recommended - requires nonfree Javascript". We should also include
a postal address where people could send in donations to provide an
alternative for those who really don't want to use the non-free service
(which doens't have to be paypal of course - any of them would likely be
as good). 

I also notice the FSF will also accept donations via credit card. There
is no credit card processing service which is based on libre software,
so the FSF is using non-free software to process those donations as
well (I guess technically, they are not directly encouraging people use
the non-free credit card processing service, but apparently it is OK for
the FSF to use it to process those donations?).

I do notice that RMS says "should not" rather than "must not", which I
think provides some 'wriggle room'. Provided we provide some way to
donate without using non-free software and state that we do not
recommend using service XXXX which uses non-free Javascript (they all
seem to at some level) and provided we are prepared to switch to a libre
solution if and when one becomes available (which I doubt it ever will),
we are probably OK. However, I am surprised that out of all the options,
the FSF uses PayPal.