[Fsf-friends] a clarification needed

[Raj Mathur]

On Tuesday 25 Nov 2008, CK Raju wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Vikram Vincent 
<vincentvikram at gmail.com>wrote:
> > Since almost a week has passed would this be an ok time for a
> > friendly reminder?
>
> Can Vikram also list out which work of yours towards attainment of
> the objectives of Free Software is impeded due to this so as to make
> this issue a generic one worthy for a public discussion ? If there
> are no such compelling reasons, then the question becomes frivolous.
> A state is needed only when a section of its constituents are
> threatened in their understanding and functioning towards common
> goals. Where goals are explicit, means are obvious, deviations are
> undesired and understood - then there is no need for a state - a
> minimal state is all what is needed.

Without trying to devalue the contribution of FSFI and its current board 
in any way, I still agree with Vikram.  Openness, transparency and 
democracy are three values that we can't do without in this community.  
Even if you act from the best of motives and do the best of work, you 
still leave yourself open to attack unless you adhere to these 
principles.

I for one would definitely like to see information about the 
organisation, its by-laws and office-bearers, cash flows and balance 
sheets, elections (or reason for lack of), etc. made available 
publicly, on a regular basis.  If FSFI is a registered society (as I 
recall) this information has to be made available to the Registrar of 
Societies annually in any case.

Regards,

-- Raju
-- 
Raj Mathur                raju at kandalaya.org      http://kandalaya.org/
       GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5  0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F
PsyTrance & Chill: http://schizoid.in/   ||   It is the mind that moves