Re: [Spi-private] Bruce's Platform

Please would an -admin close this thread down on one list or the other?

Matthew Garrett <mjg59-spi(at)srcf(dot)ucam(dot)org>
> [...] If you're the only pro-lobbying board member, there's
> inevitably going to be friction.

I don't think that's true. There'll be tension, but friction
is not necessary - it just seems to happen a lot around here.

> "Education" is only mentioned in SPI's goals in the following place: [...]
> I see no evidence whatsoever that lobbying is within SPI's current
> remit.

Anti-swpat lobbying does seem helpful to several of its goals,
in my opinion. Whether it is the best org to do it is debatable.

> > I gave you the social contract and it's been the right one for the
> > project. The activism role belongs in SPI, and Debian's role is to be a
> > member software project of SPI.
>
> I'm sorry, I find that insulting. Nothing in the social contract defines
> Debian's role with respect to SPI. [...]

It's in the constitution. I think there's no sense flaming Bruce
for naming the wrong debian foundation document.

Quite a few interesting questions asked, though. Anyone going
to start hustings for the other candidates? Like, what are
your promises and why did you play the "I am famous" card?

Still glad I didn't stand,
--
MJR/slef
Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct