Re: [Repo-criteria-discuss] Hello experts!

[Mike Gerwitz]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 21:11:46 +0000, Juuso Lapinlampi wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:32:58PM +0200, Hein-Pieter van Braam wrote:
>> document that I can use under a free license and apply to NAB. My goals
>> for a ToS are basically just 'anything goes, except things that are
>> illegal to host in europe.' I'd like some wording about not wanting to
>> host content that endorses sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia etc.
>> Again, I have no idea how to word this in a sensible manner. 
>
> This will be off-topic for the list(?), but I don't think it's really
> sensible for service providers to start policing and moderating content
> and to enforce the law or not-law.

I don't find it to be off-topic.

> I would also argue that banning those things you mentioned would fail
> criteria C2, discriminating against classes of users. Service providers
> are also not primarily liable for user generated content.

I know you (Hein-Pieter) mean best, but I'm inclined to agree with
Juuso:  I certainly strongly condemn any of the things you mentioned,
but for a service intended to serve everyone, then that means not
discriminating against views that you might disagree with.  The ongoing
"bathroom" debate in the United States is a good example of this, with
regards to the types of people that you'd be discriminating against
(those supporting discrimination).

We have a similar view in the free software community with regards to
whether our software should be able to be used for things that we find
to be wholly unacceptable.

  https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freedom.html

> repo-criteria-discuss@: Do you agree with me, and should repository
> hosts have such criteria for A+ or so?

I'm inclined to agree that it would fail C2.

-- 
Mike Gerwitz
Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer
https://mikegerwitz.com
FSF Member #5804 | GPG Key ID: 0x8EE30EAB

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature