Steve Langasek <vorlon@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Ian is correct that there were FSF people in the audience. But the FSF
> people in the audience were also Debian people. If those people would like
> me as an organizer to apologize for Linus being given a soapbox at DebConf,
> I will do so - because I genuinely /am/ sorry that this happened. But I
> think it's nonsensical for Debian to apologize to the FSF over something
> that offends people who are part of *both* organizations, and who are
> entirely capable of grasping the nuance of Linus being a non-Debian person
> expressing views that Debian does not share towards one of Debian's partners
> in the community.
I was in the audience (and stayed there, deciding against trying to jump
the queue or take the session into overtime to rebut/question the
accusations, which everyone may be surprised to learn I think are
without foundation).
For context, Linus has used those words to describe the FSF, on video,
more than once before. I think he left out the "on drugs" part this
time. I know this because it is part of my job to collect criticism of
the FSF, sometimes suboptimally worded, and figure out which nuggets can
help us improve. I experienced that part of the Q&A through that filter.
I am thankful for people's concern and the supportive things said to me
after the event, at a personal level and for the FSF. While I think we
all owe better treatment to each other than what was on stage, I don't
think any DebConf organizers, or any other Debian folks, owe me or the
FSF an apology.
honestly,
-john
(executive director @ FSF, not-active-enough debian developer in "free" time)
--
Please respect the privacy of this mailing list. Some posts may be declassified
3 years after posting as per http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002
Archive: file://master.debian.org/~debian/archive/debian-private/
To UNSUBSCRIBE, use the web form at <http://db.debian.org/>.
|
|
