Re: Call for seconds: Delegate to the DPL

[Bill Allombert <ballombe@debian.org>]

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 04:36:29PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Bill Allombert dijo [Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:07:29PM +0100]:
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:25:17AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > This is also something we discussed before sending this call for
> > > votes. But how can we gauge whether the project is OK with issuing
> > > political statements or not? The only tool we were able to find is a
> > > GR.
> > 
> > The less we know about the political opinion of each others, the better for
> > the project. After all we only agreed to uphold the SC and nothing else.
> > 
> > We are a technical entity. We do not need to know other developers opinions on
> > issues unrelated to FLOSS to work together, and let us face it, it is easier to
> > work together if we ignore whether we have major political disagreement.
> 
> Yet, my belief is that all human interactions are political in
> nature. In some aspects of politics, you and I will not be the least
> aligned. But I believe our project is _first and foremost_ a political
> statement (that produces a first-grade technological artifact).

One major risk for Debian continued existence is that we start to become
suspicious of each other political views outside FLOSS, that we start to see
"collaborating with someone as part of our Debian activity" as "associating" 
with them, and that "associating" with them start to become socially
problematic.  There is a precedent for that.

That is why I am quite against the whole 'community' view of Debian.

In practice, it is very hard to participate in such GR without revealing 
political views, as you can see by reading the discussion.

> > And it is quite difficult discussing a ballot option without revealing such
> > opinions. We have enough topics for flamewar already. This will only leads
> > to more fracturation of the project.
> > 
> > But this GR is not about issuing political statements in general, it is about
> > issuing a particular statement, which leads directly to the second issue, are
> > GR (with the time limit, the amendment process, etc) the best medium to draft
> > political statement that correctly addresses the issue while furthering Debian
> > goal ?
> 
> I do not know. But I think that's something that can, and ought, be
> put to the table.

It seems like you are underestimating the risks and overestimating the rewards.
Such statement is only useful if written by people that understand enough of
EU law terminology to address the issue. I asked whether the lawyer that drafted
it was familiar with EU law and it does not seem to be the case. We should not
make a statement that can be used against us.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here.