1 files changed, 94 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/posts/faq.md b/posts/faq.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..89ee0b6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/posts/faq.md
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+title: Answering frequently asked questions
+author: The GNU Assembly
+date: 2021-04-21 19:00:00
+---
+
+Following the [Assembly
+kick-off](https://web.gnu.tools/en/blog/2021/04/kicking-off-the-gnu-assembly/),
+we received lots of questions and read comments that deserved answers.
+This post attempts to answer the most common questions.
+
+# Meta-question: why so much confusion around GNU/FSF?
+
+Good question!  A common belief is that GNU and the Free Software
+Foundation (FSF) are the same thing.  This is untrue: GNU is not a
+registered non-profit, it’s an informal association among contributors,
+separate from the FSF.  The FSF is oblivious to technical matters in
+GNU.
+
+The FSF supports GNU development primarily in three ways: As legal
+guardian (copyright assignments, acting on legal disputes or legal
+representation), as [fiscal sponsor](https://www.fsf.org/working-together/fund)
+for some GNU packages, and by providing infrastructure like
+[Savannah](https://savannah.gnu.org).
+
+# Is this a fork of GNU?
+
+No.  The [software in question](/en/software) is not being forked and
+the people who write that software remain the same.
+
+What changes is how these people organize themselves beyond their
+individual projects—from a
+[BDFL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictator_for_life)
+top-down model to a [community-oriented, consensus-based
+model](https://gnu.tools/en/documents/governance/).
+
+# Is the GNU Assembly an initiative of an existing Free Software organization or is it sponsored by a specific corporation?
+
+No, it’s not!  The Assembly was founded by GNU maintainers on personal
+title and receives no support, financial or otherwise, from any
+organization at this time.  At the moment the Assembly uses the
+resources of the individuals listed.  We will publicly list anybody or
+any organization that provides us with sponsorship or resources to be
+completely transparent.
+
+# You’re just a minority anyway
+
+That’s not a question, but you’re right: about [30 people](/en/people),
+mostly appointed GNU maintainers, endorsed the [Social
+Contract](/en/documents/social-contract) so far and may participate in
+the Assembly.  The number keeps increasing but is still a fraction of
+the number of contributors to GNU packages: there are 300+ GNU
+maintainers “on file”, though not everyone and [not each project is
+active](https://wingolog.org/archives/2020/02/09/state-of-the-gnunion-2020),
+[some](https://github.com/gnuradio/gr-governance/blob/main/aoa.md)
+[even](https://www.r-project.org/foundation/)
+[left](https://lwn.net/Articles/529522/)
+[years](https://wingolog.org/archives/2009/12/13/gnu-gnome-and-the-fsf)
+[ago](https://discourse.gnome.org/t/relation-between-gimp-and-gnome/2376/8)
+for all practical purposes despite being [still
+listed](https://www.gnu.org/software)—these projects have their own
+governance model and rules, independent of “the rest of GNU”.
+
+Anyway, is being a minority a problem?  We don’t think so: we hope this
+platform appeals to many GNU contributors and contributors-to-be, but we
+can do great things even without on-boarding everyone!
+
+# Why now?  Is this really about <current event>?
+
+While current events certainly motivated the decision to make our 
+efforts more visible, the desire for stronger collaboration 
+between GNU packages and for communal decision-making as it 
+pertains to a shared vision has been the subject of many 
+discussions among GNU maintainers and contributors over the past 
+decade or so.
+
+# Why didn’t you try to effect change from the inside?
+
+We did!  It goes back to [at least ten
+years](/en/blog/2021/04/kicking-off-the-gnu-assembly/).  The project was
+met with enthusiasm from some and hostility from others.  That’s fine,
+we don’t have to agree!
+
+Unfortunately, GNU would host project-wide discussions on private
+mailing lists, so these discussions and soul searching were only known
+to “insiders”.  The Assembly is determined to have transparent
+processes; everything we did, starting with the drafting process of the
+Social Contract in 2019–2020, was done publicly.
+
+# Do you support PDP-11 assembly?
+
+Some of us write assembly code (not sure about
+[PDP-11](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-11) though), but all this is
+about [a different kind of
+“assembly”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_assembly).