3 ms·
I signed it. I'm not against RMS, I just don't think he should lead GNU. I think the GNU Advisory Committee is better suited to lead things. I believe both the
by mattl 7y ago
I signed it. I'm not against RMS, I just don't think he should lead GNU. I think the GNU Advisory Committee is better suited to lead things. I believe both the FSF board and the GAC need term limits and I hope they implement them.
- computerex 7y ago> I just don't think he should lead GNU That'd classify as being against RMS. You can argue semantics all you want, but with someone else as I am not interested.
- javagram 7y agoAre you a different person from the mattl who recently tweeted > Support free software. > Don’t support Stallman. https://twitter.com/mattl/status/1177355118829854720?s=20 https://twitter.com/mattl/status/1177355118829854720?s=20 In any case I think it’s clear the letter is against Stallman retaining the leadership role and therefore in a binary supporter/adversary framing, the signers should not be considered “supporters” of RMS.
- wott 7y ago> I'm not against RMS, Go read again all the attacks against RMS you've been spouting along the last weeks, then come back and say that again with a straight face. Unbelievable...
- dragonwriter 7y ago> I'm not against RMS, I just don't think he should lead GNU. The second half of that sentence pits you directly against RMS, who has made clear he does not intend to leave his position with GNU.
- qbaqbaqba 7y agoAnd so you have seized the opportunity. Disgusting.