I know that not everyone on this board is a freetard, but the FSF is holding a survey to decide on its future strategies and how it should use its money. It's probably a good time to tell them how you feel about their politics and what they do with donation money.
I know some of you care about them and so I'm kinda interested by what you guys would ask from them.
I personally centered my answers around GPL enforcement, investment on Free hardware and software development and suggested they tried to stay out of petty identity politics and stop wasting funds on outreach program a la Gnome Foundation.
>>Movement-building: Increasing diversity and empowered representation of currently underrepresented groups in free software
and you can tell them to turn that shit down
I mean if that bothers you that's the only chance you'll have to tell them for a while.
>Due to a very fast and generous response from the Free software community, the foundation now has over three months of operating costs, which is more than enough time for the pending invoices to be paid.
I don't think you understand what this means. The problem referenced here was not a big problem as it was easily fixed by restructuring a few policies protip: the problem has something to do with cashflow and unpaid invoices
You still don't understand the meaning of what I quoted. The meaning of these words do not say that Gnome foundation used the donation money to fund their outreach for women programs. The meaning of these words say that the donations allow the Gnome foundation to operate for a minimum of three months. The consequence of this three month operating cash means the foundation has ample time to collect the unpaid invoices that are due to them - three months worth of time to be precise.
You still don't understand that I don't give a shit about that. I don't want them spending donation money on anything that doesn't make the software better and their bullshit causes are putting that in jeopardy. That is a waste of funds.
It doesn't matter if it's womyn or disabled trannies from outer space, it puts them in in a tight spot, financially and strategically, and doesn't help what they're supposed to spend the money on at all.
You know the outreach program for women. Do you actually believe that the women are writing random software for money? The two women that Gnome had sponsored had them writing Gnome software. Their contributions have gone into the Gnome codebase.
Why is there an outreach program for women? Why is there not just an outreach program for people wanting to contribute? In fact, why is there an outreach program at all? The money could better be spent to improve the business and than normal workers could be attracted instead of getting the best of the worst through an outreach program.
I don't think you understand the difference between the OpW and the paid internships.
This might clear things up a bit: https://wiki.gnome.org/action/show/Outreachy?action=show&redirect=OutreachProgramForWomen
But already if you look at the offered internships at Gnome that's way more than just two.
Gnome always had paid interns programs, the OpW however selects people who will get a preferential treatment in getting said internship, not based on their merit but based on the trendy identity politics of the hour.
Additionally, as stated here https://gnome.org/opw/ , OpW is/wasn't about making Gnome better. It's about "helping women (cis and trans), trans men, and genderqueer people get involved in free and open source software.".
ie: that's diversity hire and thus a waste of money.
Butthurt capitalistic pig developer detected.
* code in this page.
* Copyright (C) 2016 Free Software Foundation.
* it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
* (GNU GPL) as published by the Free Software Foundation, either version 3
* of the License, or (at your option) any later version. The code is
* distributed WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
* MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU GPL
* for more details.
* As additional permission under GNU GPL version 3 section 7, you may
* distribute non-source (e.g., minimized or compacted) forms of that code
* without the copy of the GNU GPL normally required by section 4, provided
* you include this license notice and a URL through which recipients can
* access the Corresponding Source.
* in this page.