[fosscomm] DEADLINE for FOSSCOM position on Draft Policy: 10.00 AM July July 9th.

V. Sasi Kumar sasi.fsf at gmail.com
Wed Jul 8 21:23:49 PDT 2009


On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 23:06 +0530, prabir wrote:

> However, the argument of my being with CPIM and therefore not
> "eligible", as Arun puts it, is completely extranneous -- political
> affliation should neither be a  criterion for nor against in FOSSCOMM.
> The only test in FOSSCOMM should be what is the stand of the
> organisation or the individual on specific FOSSCOMM issues. Politics,
> caste, religion, language, ethnicity, etc., are not the basis of
> FOSSCOMM -- these are all exclusionary or divisive principles. 


Prabir, I agree with you, to an extent, that a person's political
convictions should not make a difference to FOSSCOMM. At the same time,
I think all of us would want FOSSCOMM to remain politically neutral,
unaffiliated to any political party. This is needed because the
objective of the FOSS community is to promote the ideals of FOSS and
this may need the support of parties across the political spectrum. I
also agree that every person has some kind of political convictions. But
if the person who represents FOSSCOMM is a known activist of a
particular political party, that could become a handicap when we need to
seek help from other political parties. It could potentially even lead
to FOSSCOMM being branded as an arm of a political party, which will be
a handicap. I think we should follow the norm of not having a political
activist leading us or representing us, irrespective of the party to
which (s)he belongs. This could also mean that we may have to say no to
very capable people.

> By the way, I do not know Andrew's political affliation, if any!

That, precisely, is the advantage that Andrew has -- that no one knows
about his political affiliation.

Best
-- 
V. Sasi Kumar
Free Software Foundation of India
Please visit http://swatantryam.blogspot.com 




More information about the network mailing list