@tim.one, thanks for the advice, though I am somewhat shocked to hear this.
I am really trying to give people the benefit of the doubt.
Your “people don’t want” and following seems to imply, to me, at best, an unpleasant toxic atmosphere with cult-like groupthink, at worst an environment that organizes harrassment against those raising topics that “must not be talked about”, similar to the state controlled mobs targeting intellectuals and artists in the Soviet Union, where any attempts at defense are used to further condemn the victim.
This seems to be quite harsh, and I do not share this assessment! At least, I try to be charitable and assume best intentions. And apologies in advance, if I misinterpreted what you were implying.
For instance, @brettcannon has, in the first response even, directed me helpfully to the legal team of PSF, the e-mail address legal-at-psf!
There has been no response yet, but it has been only a week. I am sure they will eventually respond, and clear up all the questions that the communtiy might have.
For convenience after a couple small detours, the list of questions again:
- when was this change of T&C decided and by whom?
- are there minutes or other documents of the decision?
- what is the key rationale behind the paragraph “… PSF reserves the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason at any time.”?
- is there a clear legal assessment on whether moving to a paid service model jeopardizes the 501(c) US non-profit status?
- does or did the aforementioned decision require a vote by the meeting of members?
- on the confirmed paid services or products, are there planned collaborations with one or more corporations, possibly hyperscalers?
- Deb’s response above seems to imply (though does not state explicitly) that the “paid organization” featured linked above is the only paid feature or product planned over the next years. Is this true or false, to the best of your knowledge?