Re: association vs job site

[Richard Stallman]

    Maybe, if you agree, will be better state that:
        "following the GNU Project's policies"
     will have priority over:
        "controlled by its users"

      The Ethics Officer will be appointed by the Free Software
      Foundation, Inc. to ensure the below points, having veto
      power over all subject related to such points:

         * the integrity of the GNU name is not breached
         * the Association follows the Free Software philosophy and

Those changes would solve the problem from the FSF's point of view.
You could run the job site for us and the FSF could be confident
there is no conflict.

However, since this would greatly reduce the extent to which the
organization is controlled by its members, I think people looking for
an organization which is truly member-controlled would be likely to be
disappointed.

I think that you must have had certain aims in mind when you
wrote down that this association would be controlled by its users,
and I suspect that the plan as modified in this way won't meet
all of those aims.

Perhaps what you really want is to have two separate organizations,
one to run a job site and one to be controlled by its users.

Or perhaps you want to have an organization controlled by its users,
and its name would not include "GNU".  The GNU Herds would be one
activity of that organization, and that one activity would have an
FSF-appointed Ethics Officer.

         * all possible technical measures are taken to be sure the
           Association follows the Free Software philosophy. For
           example, do not use free-to-fill fields in the employer's
           job offers and worker's qualifications.

That last rule is too specific for a charter; charters need to be
written in more general ways.  I suggest this:

         * that the activities are operated in ways that do not lend
           themselves to be abused to the detriment of the Free
           Software philosophy.