Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Future Meetings

[Simon Ward]

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 07:52:50PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> Simon Ward <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 03:03:30PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > Well, the UK is in Europe, not America […]
> >
> > > That was part of the reason that AFFS was closer to FSFE, but I felt
> > > there was also a sticking point in AFFS-FSF relations: there seemed to
> > > be some fear of democratic popular associations in the FSF (which is
> > > self-perpetuating IIRC).
> >
> > That’s one good reason for raising the profile of the FSF in the UK and
> > putting these myths to bed.
> 
> OK, I'm confused.  What are the myths in the above and what helps show
> they aren't myths?

The myth that the FSF is any less relevant just because it’s based in
the USA instead of Europe.  The strange belief that we’ve got the FSFE
so we don’t need the FSF acting in Europe.  If there was a sticking
point in relations between organisations, that it’s automatically
something with the FSF.  Also, not in the above, the myth that the FSFE
has managed much more than the FSF in the UK—I acknowledge that the FSF
could do with a kick, but I can’t say I’ve felt much coming from the
FSFE either.  Has it all happened in the South of England and so just
passed me by?  Why did we, well, Matt Lee, now FSF campaigns manager,
have to start Manchester Free Software if other organisations were doing
such a good job?

Maybe I’m reading too much into it.

This has already become an FSF vs FSFE thing, and it shouldn’t be.  This
is likely why those inter-organisational relations became sticking
points.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.
    — John Gaule

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature