Re: [Repo-criteria-discuss] Resolving the C2 question

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > The concern revolves around
  > situations in which repos are compelled to discriminate against certain
  > users by governments.

That's why we need this criterion.

  >  When they are truly compelled to do it, it doesn't
  > seem like we should downscore repositories for discriminating/censoring
  > content, right?

Yes, we must!  This is very important.

To raise the question of whether the repo operators are "compelled"
is to misunderstand the purpose of these ratings.

We are judging the _conduct_ of the repository for how it affects the
community.  Judging whether the operators are good people or bad
people is not the purpose.  If the repo mistreats people, people
should not put their programs there, because it will be bad for
other people who want to access the programs' repositories.

There are plenty of repositories that _are not compelled_ to
discriminate, and don't discriminate.  Developers should move code to
those repos.

You shouldn't run a repo if you are forbidden to run it in a just way.
Leave it to someone else who can do it justly.

This principle applies generally to all our moral standards because
all our moral standards have to do with not mistreating others.  For
instance, if you develop a program and distribute copies, you should
make them free software, because otherwise you're subjugating users.
What if you are compelled to make your software nonfree?  Then you
should not develop any software -- let others do it who can do it
justly.

It might be good to explain this point, so people understand our reasoning.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.