<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Vikram Vincent <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vincentvikram@gmail.com">vincentvikram@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Greetings,<br>From <a href="http://www.gnu.org.in/board-statement-on-recent-issues" target="_blank">http://www.gnu.org.in/board-statement-on-recent-issues</a><br><p><quote><br>
<b>
</b></p><p><b>9. Are the members of the Director Board of FSF India elected?
</b></p>
<p><snip> As mentioned
in the answer to an earlier question, FSF India is not a mass movement
and is not a democratic organisation. The purpose of FSF India, as of
FSF, is to provide guidance to the Free Software movement. This purpose
could be easily defeated if it is made into an elected body.</p><p></quote></p>India
is considered one of the biggest democracies in the world and the Free
Software Movement is for the democratisation of technology and
knowledge. However, the namesake of FSF in India ie., FSF-India, whose role is to lead the Free Software Movement has clearly defined itself as undemocratic.<br>
<br>Let us take things objectively to analyse, debate and come to some sort of an understanding.<br><br>Democracy, transparency and openness are considered the pillars of the free software movement. We talk about free(or open) standards, free knowledge, etc.. and then we hear "Democracy? That is only for theory."<br>
How can one ensure democratisation of knowledge if one is undemocratic?<br>
</blockquote><div><br>Dont know this information is relevant but i felt this might be a useful information <br><br>Quoting from RMS's Essays :<br>Chapter 20: Free Software : Freedom and Cooperation<br>paragraph 3: ( please understand the context in which this assay was written and then this paragraph will be clear)<br>
In this respect, free software is a new mechanism for democracy to operate. Pro-<br>fessor Lessig, now at Stanford, noted that code functions as a kind of law. Whoever gets to write the code that just about everybody uses for all intents and purposes is writing the laws that run people's lives. With free software, these laws get written in a democratic way. Not the classical form of democracy–we don't have a big election and say, "Everybody vote which way should this feature be done." [audience laughs] Instead we say, basically, those of you who want to work on implementing<br>
the feature this way, do it. And if you want to work on implementing the feature<br>that way, do it. And, it gets done one way or the other, you know? And so, if a lot of people want it this way, it'll get done this way. In this way, everybody contributes<br>
to the social decision by simply taking steps in the direction that he wants to go.<br> And you're free to take as many steps, personally, as you want to take. A business<br>is free to commission as many steps as they find useful to take. And after you add<br>
all these things up, that says which direction the software goes.<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Fsf-friends mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in">Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in</a><br>
<a href="http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends" target="_blank">http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>