Re: [Fsfe-uk] [Proposal] Mailing lists

[Alex Hudson]

On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 11:05, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I disagree fairly strongly with this; [...]
> 
> How can you disagree?

I disagree with the sentiment. 

The suggestion is that there is so much procedural and/or political
stuff on fsfe-uk that it a) makes it inaccessible to people, and b)
prevents "real work" (whatever that is) from taking place.

I think b) is bogus; some of the discussions are necessary, many of
which are procedural/organisational. a) probably isn't bogus, but
separating off into a separate list will just make the problem worse. If
fsfe-uk is inaccessible now (and in many ways is), affs-dicuss will be
completely toxic to all known lifeforms.

I utterly agree with many of the points Chris raised, especially about
the gratuitious use of procedural language, TLAs and other jargon.

> I think no-one is suggesting that the AFFS "operate in a vacuum" or be 
> put into a "ghetto" but merely that we try to sort things a bit more 
> neatly, moving discussion of AFFS methods to another label.

So affs-discuss would be better labelled affs-procedures, or something.
That would stop being so conflicting with fsfe-uk, but would turn into a
bog of naval gazing and arguing over petty matters. I actually think
that would disenfranchise people somewhat; it would be an exclusive club
for debating matters of operation. Those not on the list would be seen
as uninterested, rather than unable to take part. 

I would probably support the creation of an affs-procedures or similar,
since it probably would make fsfe-uk more accessible. However, that
would be in the full knowledge that the new list would probably be
completely inpenetrable :(

> This goes back to my earlier request that we find purposes for the 
> lists (including affs-discuss and fsfe-uk) that do not overlap more 
> than is unavoidable.

We already have a purpose. Discussion of free software matters in the UK
is what fsfe-uk is here for.

> I do not think discussion/information of AFFS need necessarily be the
> same as free software discussion in the UK, any more than development
> of dancer should be on fsfe-uk instead of its own list.

Development of software is a completely different task. AFFS is not a
task, it's a tool. It's a tool to develop free software in this country.
fsfe-uk should be here to discuss free software issues, and where there
is something that AFFS can be brought in to do, we should do it. AFFS is
an object through which people here (members or not) can execute action.
dancer is none of those things. By removing AFFS from fsfe-uk we
disenfranchise the wider free software community in my opinion, and
further the belief (whether true or not) that AFFS doesn't interact with
people.

Cheers,

Alex.