8 ms·

Conflicts in the GNU project now affect Guile

60 points by iso-8859-1 7y ago

tjr 7y ago
Bradley Kuhn also wrote an article with regard to recent matters with RMS, which was submitted on HN a couple of days ago, and (I think) received inadequate attention: http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262282 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262282
- linuxftw 7y ago
  How brave of Bradley to pile on publicly after RMS has resigned from a couple posts.
  - geofft 7y ago
    From his post, the only reason he spoke up now instead of earlier because he was being censored by the FSF and had to resign his FSF membership to be able to speak freely. However, Conservancy (his employer) spoke up quite a while ago, before RMS resigned: https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-speak-for-us/ https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-spea...
emacsdevel 7y ago
It's an unfortunate fact that the GNU projects and their email lists have always attracted difficult people. If your organization is founded on inflexible ideological commitment (as the FSF is) then you will end up appealing to a lot of inflexible, idealistic people who are very committed to having things go their way. RMS has been one of the worst offenders in many well-documented ways, but every GNU project I'm familiar with has had its share of "missing stairs", who are often among the most vocal people on the project's -devel email list. Many of them are extremely proficient technically, but abrasive to others in ways that they might not recognize. For newcomers to the projects this can lead to unpleasant interactions that push people away from volunteering on the projects. At the same time, this shouldn't push you away from getting involved with a GNU project if you find it interesting. Many of the projects are full of kind, helpful, hardworking people. The maintainers in particular are mostly excellent. If you have an unpleasant interaction, I'd encourage you to reach out to one of the maintainers in a private message to ask for advice on how to contribute and work with the community. Often they can help by pointing you to specific people to talk to and interact with.
letstrynvm 7y ago
That email says how the author doesn't like rms or his various writings, then switches to an unrelated drama about how the author fell out with a major contributor and there's some ongoing shitstorm in the project due to that. The title makes it sound like rms' fault but he only features to be ritually denounced in the first half. I had to google what guile was I'll certainly be trying to avoid it now.
- wahern 7y ago
  > I had to google what guile was I'll certainly be trying to avoid it now. By avoiding Guile or Wingo's otherwise instructive technical notes (see, e.g., https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/06/27/growing-fibers https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/06/27/growing-fibers), aren't you likewise conflating character with merit? I've never used Guile (I'm invested in Lua), but I like to follow the development. It's an interesting and high-quality project.
- theli0nheart 7y ago
  [deleted]
  - mlyle 7y ago
    There's an appearance of impropriety. Guile's maintainers have been critical of RMS, and now RMS is meddling in the governance of Guile. It seems like the meddling may be to ensure that RMS has allies on that project...
- cannonedhamster 7y ago
  You appear to have missed where RMS was supposed to have appointed a new co-maintainer without asking anyone in the current team, therefore asserting ownership of a project he was uninvolved with in what appears to a spiteful reason related to his speaking out against RMS. It's in the bottom of the message. It's weird that your response is to threaten to avoid something you've never known about before. Unless you were active in the GNU community already you wouldn't have had reason to use it, so you've not created GNU extensions, were unaware of the language and the threat you're making is that you'll avoid it. Regardless of whether the statements are accurate, I'll hold judgement until hearing the other side though it does seem odd. I'd be curious what the prospective co-maintainer wants since he quit prior without resolving issues.
catalogia 7y ago
It's really disappointing to see this conflict seem to metastasize.
cma 7y ago
> He threatened to leave because he wished to be consulted before I landed mixed definitions and expressions Damn, isn't that what made Guido quit Python as well?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ploxiln 7y ago
  I think it was sort of the opposite. That was about the new "walrus operator" (:=) and there was quite a lot of proposals, consultation, a PEP, and lots of flaming on public mailing lists, and apparently this flaming included people who Guido respected the opinion of, and some would be quite angry at him either way he chose over this issue, IIRC.
Kenji 7y ago
The revolution devours its own. Liberal is being taken down by libero-fascists. Funny. I pause here to mention that you may not agree with this perspective and that is fine. There are many ways that we can continue to work together while this discussion plays out. Part of the purpose of this mail though is to make it clear that there are differences of opinion and that the GNU project is in flux. How about, you know, doing GNU things like promoting free software and creating great tools? How about not doing politics and instead behaving professionally? Has everyone forgotten about why GNU is great? Has the OpenSource world devolved into a kindergarten or can we get our shit together and write code again? Seems like all this inclusivity has brought a bunch of immature people into positions of power.
gdwatson 7y ago
I don't know anything about the current goings on, but I read Wingo's blog for his fascinating technical insights. He has written some controversial things on hiring and collaboration that I do not agree with but do find helpful to understand what he's writing here about RMS: https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/09/04/the-hardest-thing-about-hiring-is-avoiding-the-fash https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/09/04/the-hardest-thing-a... https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/09/05/a-new-interview-question https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/09/05/a-new-interview-que... Edit: The important takeaway for me is that he regards a host of project-unrelated views, including pro-free-speech views, as disqualifying.
- war1025 7y ago
  Never heard of this guy before. I read the email that this post links to, and thought he seemed fairly reasonable, even if he seemed to be airing some dirty laundry that didn't seem to do much other than to stir up drama. Now that I read the two articles you posted, I feel unsure of who is in the wrong here. As someone who almost certainly falls into a part of the political spectrum that he views as "problematic", I feel less inclined to take his plight seriously...
- catalogia 7y ago
  I'm not sure either of these blog posts are relevant. To my knowledge he's not accused Mark Weaver of being either a fascist or a sexist.
  - techwizrd 7y ago
    As some of the comments in the linked articles explain, he seems to uncharitably read into comments people make. He assumes the worst in people and then publicly paints them as personae non gratae based on what may be, at best, a mischaracterization.
    - catalogia 7y ago
      I can't say I disagree with your take on the matter, but I don't think airing anybody's personality flaws on HN is in the best interests of Guile or GNU. The individuals involved are probably already aware of each other's personality quirks and don't need this forum to help them discuss the matter.
wruza 7y ago
“Ability to differentiate = intelligence. Disability to differentitate is making us stupid.” Trivial but worth a frame on the wall.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
billyjobob 7y ago
Stallman is GNU. GNU is Stallman. If the project maintainer has a problem with Stallman issuing orders then he has a problem with being part of GNU. If a GNU project has problems with GNU then the solution is to fork the project into a non-GNU project, not try to usurp the name GNU into meaning something that is not RMS.
- emacsdevel 7y ago
  Stallman hasn't been a significant technical contributor to any GNU project for more than a decade. Making important contributions to a project doesn't mean you own it forever - it's a bittersweet fact that groups, organizations, and companies can grow and evolve in ways that are incompatible with their original founder sticking around. The FSF owns the copyright to most GNU projects, and RMS has resigned from the FSF. It's unclear why he would continue to have any formal authority beyond his personal power of persuasion.
- geofft 7y ago
  This has been done before multiple times and the resulting technical work significantly improved GNU (ECGS and EGLIBC come to mind). Also, historically, GNU maintainers aren't obligated to give total deference to RMS (the glibc steering committee comes to mind). So while "RMS is the king" might be true on paper, it's been neither true nor helpful to GNU in practice, and insisting on it simply hurts projects that are less well-staffed to fight political fights or organize forks. It doesn't help the free software movement at all.
  - emacsdevel 7y ago
    Don't forget XEmacs!
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
etiam 7y ago
Finally some concrete examples of what RMS is alleged to have done wrong. All those references from stallman.org seems like perfectly reasonable opinions to hold and express though. Seems like you'd have to be fairly deep into radical leftism to read it as anything that "speaks for itself" that the author is due for an extra large helping of sexual taboo condemnations and being ousted from his job. But if this is the level of differences that will cause cooperation-breaking conflicts these people can't work together. Non-GNU Guile?
- onli 7y ago
  Yes. I picked randomly three of the linked statements and completely agreed with them, and I see myself as being on the left myself.
- bitwize 7y ago
  The funny thing is, there is no calling for the heads of feminist philosophers and gender theorists like Gayle Rubin and Judith Butler, both of whom have expressed views on sexuality w.r.t. children that are more abhorrent than Stallman's. (Stallman could have even been using them as references.) That makes me suspect that his personal political views are not the reason feminists want him out.
  - geofft 7y ago
    If by "feminists" you mean GNU maintainers and other free software hackers (who may well be feminists, but this is a sharp subset of feminists in society as a whole), then correct, his personal political views are not by themselves the reason they want him out. It's the fact that he is so committed to the advocacy of his personal views that he is harming the free software movement. See, for instance, this post from the author of this email (and linked in this email): https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and... > The great tragedy of RMS's tenure in the supposedly universalist FSF and GNU projects is that he behaves in a way that is particularly alienating to women. It doesn't take a genius to conclude that if you're personally driving away potential collaborators, that's a bad thing for the organization, and actively harmful to the organization's goals: software freedom is a cause that is explicitly for everyone. and this, from a former member of the FSF Board of Directors who resigned so he could speak up: http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html > More importantly to the FSF, I attempted to persuade RMS that launching a controversial campaign on sexual behavior and morality was counter to his and FSF's mission to advance software freedom [....] After years of conversing with RMS about how his non-software-freedom views were a distraction, an indulgence, and downright problematic, his general response was to make even more public comments of this nature. and this, from another former member of the FSF Board of Directors: https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html > Stallman is driving away our natural allies. It's inappropriate for him to continue as the figurehead for free software. It is not because they simply disagreed with his political beliefs - he can believe what he likes. It is about the fact that, as a leader in the free software movement, he was driving away more people with both his public advocacy of his views and his behavior (hitting on women at conferences as soon as he met them, etc.), i.e, he was not doing his job.
nkurz 7y ago
Mark Weaver's response should probably be read immediately after reading the linked post that starts the thread: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00021.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00.... To me, they both come across as eminently reasonable, and it makes me think the the Guile project is going to be in good hands regardless of what happens.
- davexunit 7y ago
  Mark is a good person. I think this can be resolved.
  - bjoli 7y ago
    Mark is also, if maybe a bit short at times, the best mailing list support there is for the lower level stuff in guile. He has been doing an angels work there I would say.
- geofft 7y ago
  The odd part here to me is that it seems to be the norm that, if you want to join the maintainer team of Guile, you ask RMS and you don't even need to talk to the existing maintainer team first. I agree that the response sounds reasonable too, and in any other development project I would be confused by how a reasonable-sounding person can take such an unreasonable-sounding approach - so I assume that this approach is reasonable and that this is in fact a norm. I think that the idea that anyone who isn't involved with the project (RMS or otherwise) gets to pick the maintainers of projects, and doesn't just defer to the existing maintainer teams in all but exceptional cases. is untenable (and has been causing unnecessary interpersonal conflicts in GNU for decades), and I hope one of the long-term results of all this is to get rid of that norm. For an example of doing things pretty firmly in the other direction, I've always liked how new hires on Canonical's OS engineering teams aren't immediately appointed Ubuntu maintainers - they have to go through the same process anyone else would. Of course they have lots of advantages (a full-time job where they work closely with most of the existing maintainers to learn everything they need to publicly demonstrate their fitness for the role), but it makes it clear that the maintainership of Ubuntu is driven by Ubuntu and not by managers at Canonical.
worik 7y ago
RMS is a difficult person. Anybody who has had anything to do with him knows that. But he is also (relatively) a old person. He comes from a era when to get heard you had to shout. His generation turned out a lot of well intentioned, but bullying, people. We are much more inclusive these days, we make efforts to broaden the appeal of our groups and ensure that people other than the usual alphas can function in them. But in that process we have become intolerant of the shouty bullying men (usually men, but not always) of old. This is mostly good. But for RMS and Linus and lots of others of the old guard there is a difficult adjustment. It is OK to have opinions. It is OK to express them. But what RMS and co. (me too, I had to, I am the same generation) had to, have to, learn is that we need to always speak our opinions softly. Because those who are "weaker" personalities than us view our shouted opinions as a affront. And if we want them in our groups, and I know I do, we have to accommodate them. It seems RMS is stepping out of the way. I know Linus did. Any takers for a sweepstake on when Theo de Raadt will?
- hollerith 7y ago
  >It seems RMS is stepping out of the way. I know Linus did. When and how did Linus step out of the way? Are you referring to this event (quoting Wikipedia): >On Sunday, September 16, 2018 the Linux Kernel Code of Conflict was suddenly replaced by a new Code of Conduct based on the Contributor Covenant. Shortly thereafter, in the release notes for Linux 4.19-rc4, Linus apologized for his behavior, calling the personal attacks of the past "unprofessional and uncalled for" and announced a period of "time off" to "get some assistance on how to understand people's emotions and respond appropriately". It soon transpired that these events followed The New Yorker approaching Linus with a series of questions critical of his conduct. Following the release of Linux 4.19 on October 22, Linus went back to maintaining the kernel.
  - worik 7y ago
    Yes. That would be what I meant. I'm hazy on the details thanks for the extra information
kragen 7y ago
When I was 17, I started dating the woman who I married when I was 20. She was older than I was, so it's fairly horrifying to me to see people publicly equating "pedophilia" with "sex between adults and teenagers". It makes my old wounds ache to see respected community leaders like Andy Wingo publicly accusing her of pedophilia and, implicitly, of abusive behavior, promoting the unwarranted social stigma we had to struggle against for the entire duration of our relationship. Although we were only intimate partners for seven years, the relationship was not in any way a matter of her taking advantage of me or abusing me. The relationship changed my life dramatically for the better, and I still love her, even though it has been some years since we last saw each other. I thank God I lived in New Mexico, where the age of consent was low enough to protect her from legal risks in addition to the social ostracism she did suffer. To state my position clearly, there is nothing wrong with sexual relationships between adults and older teenagers. It is not a result of pedophilia, nor is that situation inherently abusive. It does require special attention to issues of inequality of power stemming from economic and social differences, as well as the special difficulties faced by any relationship involving teenagers or people in their early twenties stemming from inexperience and higher levels of impulsivity. Of course, the relationship that provoked this controversy had nothing of this egalitarian character. According to the account of Virginia Giuffre, the victim, she was enslaved by serial rapist Jeffrey Epstein, who preyed on teenagers precisely because of their economic and psychological vulnerability; he ordered her to have sex with a variety of men who were presumably unaware of her enslavement. Her obedient efforts at seducing Stallman’s friend Marvin Minsky included accompanying him on travel around the country, but she has not alleged that they actually had sex or that he knew of her enslavement. Physicist Gregory Benford testified to observing Minsky reject Giuffre’s advances. Epstein may have had an additional motive for preying on teenagers: he maintained a large library of surreptitious video recordings of famous men having sex with enslaved underage women. There is evidence that Epstein was working for the US Intelligence Community; prosecutor Acosta accepted an unconscionable level of impunity as a result. Stallman defending his dead friend Minsky from wholly unfounded allegations of “sexual assault” on the basis of the above facts is what provoked the current controversy. I find it profoundly appalling to see people like Andy Wingo equating people like my beloved first wife to perpetrators of atrocities like Jeffrey Epstein, asserting that the most important fact about our relationship is that I, like Giuffre, was 17 years old when it began.
vfclists 7y ago
I think Andy Wingo issues with GNU should be more focused on his RMS management style and not his political or social views. But it is clear that a number of people involved in the GNU projects have had issues with the management style and personality of RMS quite separate from his non-conformist views raising views on sexual mores. Andy Wingo focusing on his views relating to sex risks turning one thing into another. He should just focus on the management issues within GNU projects and ignore the unconventional sexual views. The Epstein case shouldn't be an excuse or a rationale for focusing on the leadership of RMS. Having RMS as the leader of the GNU project is like having mildly eccentric relatives, especially parents. You just have to live with them.

60 points by iso-8859-1 7y ago

tjr 7y ago

Bradley Kuhn also wrote an article with regard to recent matters with RMS, which was submitted on HN a couple of days ago, and (I think) received inadequate attention: http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262282 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21262282

linuxftw 7y ago
How brave of Bradley to pile on publicly after RMS has resigned from a couple posts.
- geofft 7y ago
  From his post, the only reason he spoke up now instead of earlier because he was being censored by the FSF and had to resign his FSF membership to be able to speak freely. However, Conservancy (his employer) spoke up quite a while ago, before RMS resigned: https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-speak-for-us/ https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-spea...

emacsdevel 7y ago

It's an unfortunate fact that the GNU projects and their email lists have always attracted difficult people. If your organization is founded on inflexible ideological commitment (as the FSF is) then you will end up appealing to a lot of inflexible, idealistic people who are very committed to having things go their way. RMS has been one of the worst offenders in many well-documented ways, but every GNU project I'm familiar with has had its share of "missing stairs", who are often among the most vocal people on the project's -devel email list. Many of them are extremely proficient technically, but abrasive to others in ways that they might not recognize. For newcomers to the projects this can lead to unpleasant interactions that push people away from volunteering on the projects. At the same time, this shouldn't push you away from getting involved with a GNU project if you find it interesting. Many of the projects are full of kind, helpful, hardworking people. The maintainers in particular are mostly excellent. If you have an unpleasant interaction, I'd encourage you to reach out to one of the maintainers in a private message to ask for advice on how to contribute and work with the community. Often they can help by pointing you to specific people to talk to and interact with.

letstrynvm 7y ago

That email says how the author doesn't like rms or his various writings, then switches to an unrelated drama about how the author fell out with a major contributor and there's some ongoing shitstorm in the project due to that. The title makes it sound like rms' fault but he only features to be ritually denounced in the first half. I had to google what guile was I'll certainly be trying to avoid it now.

wahern 7y ago
> I had to google what guile was I'll certainly be trying to avoid it now. By avoiding Guile or Wingo's otherwise instructive technical notes (see, e.g., https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/06/27/growing-fibers https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/06/27/growing-fibers), aren't you likewise conflating character with merit? I've never used Guile (I'm invested in Lua), but I like to follow the development. It's an interesting and high-quality project.
theli0nheart 7y ago
[deleted]
- mlyle 7y ago
  There's an appearance of impropriety. Guile's maintainers have been critical of RMS, and now RMS is meddling in the governance of Guile. It seems like the meddling may be to ensure that RMS has allies on that project...
cannonedhamster 7y ago
You appear to have missed where RMS was supposed to have appointed a new co-maintainer without asking anyone in the current team, therefore asserting ownership of a project he was uninvolved with in what appears to a spiteful reason related to his speaking out against RMS. It's in the bottom of the message. It's weird that your response is to threaten to avoid something you've never known about before. Unless you were active in the GNU community already you wouldn't have had reason to use it, so you've not created GNU extensions, were unaware of the language and the threat you're making is that you'll avoid it. Regardless of whether the statements are accurate, I'll hold judgement until hearing the other side though it does seem odd. I'd be curious what the prospective co-maintainer wants since he quit prior without resolving issues.

catalogia 7y ago

It's really disappointing to see this conflict seem to metastasize.

cma 7y ago

> He threatened to leave because he wished to be consulted before I landed mixed definitions and expressions Damn, isn't that what made Guido quit Python as well?

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ploxiln 7y ago
I think it was sort of the opposite. That was about the new "walrus operator" (:=) and there was quite a lot of proposals, consultation, a PEP, and lots of flaming on public mailing lists, and apparently this flaming included people who Guido respected the opinion of, and some would be quite angry at him either way he chose over this issue, IIRC.

Kenji 7y ago

The revolution devours its own. Liberal is being taken down by libero-fascists. Funny. I pause here to mention that you may not agree with this perspective and that is fine. There are many ways that we can continue to work together while this discussion plays out. Part of the purpose of this mail though is to make it clear that there are differences of opinion and that the GNU project is in flux. How about, you know, doing GNU things like promoting free software and creating great tools? How about not doing politics and instead behaving professionally? Has everyone forgotten about why GNU is great? Has the OpenSource world devolved into a kindergarten or can we get our shit together and write code again? Seems like all this inclusivity has brought a bunch of immature people into positions of power.

gdwatson 7y ago

I don't know anything about the current goings on, but I read Wingo's blog for his fascinating technical insights. He has written some controversial things on hiring and collaboration that I do not agree with but do find helpful to understand what he's writing here about RMS: https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/09/04/the-hardest-thing-about-hiring-is-avoiding-the-fash https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/09/04/the-hardest-thing-a... https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/09/05/a-new-interview-question https://wingolog.org/archives/2017/09/05/a-new-interview-que... Edit: The important takeaway for me is that he regards a host of project-unrelated views, including pro-free-speech views, as disqualifying.

war1025 7y ago
Never heard of this guy before. I read the email that this post links to, and thought he seemed fairly reasonable, even if he seemed to be airing some dirty laundry that didn't seem to do much other than to stir up drama. Now that I read the two articles you posted, I feel unsure of who is in the wrong here. As someone who almost certainly falls into a part of the political spectrum that he views as "problematic", I feel less inclined to take his plight seriously...
catalogia 7y ago
I'm not sure either of these blog posts are relevant. To my knowledge he's not accused Mark Weaver of being either a fascist or a sexist.
- techwizrd 7y ago
  As some of the comments in the linked articles explain, he seems to uncharitably read into comments people make. He assumes the worst in people and then publicly paints them as personae non gratae based on what may be, at best, a mischaracterization.
  - catalogia 7y ago
    I can't say I disagree with your take on the matter, but I don't think airing anybody's personality flaws on HN is in the best interests of Guile or GNU. The individuals involved are probably already aware of each other's personality quirks and don't need this forum to help them discuss the matter.

wruza 7y ago

“Ability to differentiate = intelligence. Disability to differentitate is making us stupid.” Trivial but worth a frame on the wall.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

billyjobob 7y ago

Stallman is GNU. GNU is Stallman. If the project maintainer has a problem with Stallman issuing orders then he has a problem with being part of GNU. If a GNU project has problems with GNU then the solution is to fork the project into a non-GNU project, not try to usurp the name GNU into meaning something that is not RMS.

emacsdevel 7y ago
Stallman hasn't been a significant technical contributor to any GNU project for more than a decade. Making important contributions to a project doesn't mean you own it forever - it's a bittersweet fact that groups, organizations, and companies can grow and evolve in ways that are incompatible with their original founder sticking around. The FSF owns the copyright to most GNU projects, and RMS has resigned from the FSF. It's unclear why he would continue to have any formal authority beyond his personal power of persuasion.
geofft 7y ago
This has been done before multiple times and the resulting technical work significantly improved GNU (ECGS and EGLIBC come to mind). Also, historically, GNU maintainers aren't obligated to give total deference to RMS (the glibc steering committee comes to mind). So while "RMS is the king" might be true on paper, it's been neither true nor helpful to GNU in practice, and insisting on it simply hurts projects that are less well-staffed to fight political fights or organize forks. It doesn't help the free software movement at all.
- emacsdevel 7y ago
  Don't forget XEmacs!
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

etiam 7y ago

Finally some concrete examples of what RMS is alleged to have done wrong. All those references from stallman.org seems like perfectly reasonable opinions to hold and express though. Seems like you'd have to be fairly deep into radical leftism to read it as anything that "speaks for itself" that the author is due for an extra large helping of sexual taboo condemnations and being ousted from his job. But if this is the level of differences that will cause cooperation-breaking conflicts these people can't work together. Non-GNU Guile?

onli 7y ago
Yes. I picked randomly three of the linked statements and completely agreed with them, and I see myself as being on the left myself.
bitwize 7y ago
The funny thing is, there is no calling for the heads of feminist philosophers and gender theorists like Gayle Rubin and Judith Butler, both of whom have expressed views on sexuality w.r.t. children that are more abhorrent than Stallman's. (Stallman could have even been using them as references.) That makes me suspect that his personal political views are not the reason feminists want him out.
- geofft 7y ago
  If by "feminists" you mean GNU maintainers and other free software hackers (who may well be feminists, but this is a sharp subset of feminists in society as a whole), then correct, his personal political views are not by themselves the reason they want him out. It's the fact that he is so committed to the advocacy of his personal views that he is harming the free software movement. See, for instance, this post from the author of this email (and linked in this email): https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and... > The great tragedy of RMS's tenure in the supposedly universalist FSF and GNU projects is that he behaves in a way that is particularly alienating to women. It doesn't take a genius to conclude that if you're personally driving away potential collaborators, that's a bad thing for the organization, and actively harmful to the organization's goals: software freedom is a cause that is explicitly for everyone. and this, from a former member of the FSF Board of Directors who resigned so he could speak up: http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html > More importantly to the FSF, I attempted to persuade RMS that launching a controversial campaign on sexual behavior and morality was counter to his and FSF's mission to advance software freedom [....] After years of conversing with RMS about how his non-software-freedom views were a distraction, an indulgence, and downright problematic, his general response was to make even more public comments of this nature. and this, from another former member of the FSF Board of Directors: https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html > Stallman is driving away our natural allies. It's inappropriate for him to continue as the figurehead for free software. It is not because they simply disagreed with his political beliefs - he can believe what he likes. It is about the fact that, as a leader in the free software movement, he was driving away more people with both his public advocacy of his views and his behavior (hitting on women at conferences as soon as he met them, etc.), i.e, he was not doing his job.

nkurz 7y ago

Mark Weaver's response should probably be read immediately after reading the linked post that starts the thread: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00021.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00.... To me, they both come across as eminently reasonable, and it makes me think the the Guile project is going to be in good hands regardless of what happens.

davexunit 7y ago
Mark is a good person. I think this can be resolved.
- bjoli 7y ago
  Mark is also, if maybe a bit short at times, the best mailing list support there is for the lower level stuff in guile. He has been doing an angels work there I would say.
geofft 7y ago
The odd part here to me is that it seems to be the norm that, if you want to join the maintainer team of Guile, you ask RMS and you don't even need to talk to the existing maintainer team first. I agree that the response sounds reasonable too, and in any other development project I would be confused by how a reasonable-sounding person can take such an unreasonable-sounding approach - so I assume that this approach is reasonable and that this is in fact a norm. I think that the idea that anyone who isn't involved with the project (RMS or otherwise) gets to pick the maintainers of projects, and doesn't just defer to the existing maintainer teams in all but exceptional cases. is untenable (and has been causing unnecessary interpersonal conflicts in GNU for decades), and I hope one of the long-term results of all this is to get rid of that norm. For an example of doing things pretty firmly in the other direction, I've always liked how new hires on Canonical's OS engineering teams aren't immediately appointed Ubuntu maintainers - they have to go through the same process anyone else would. Of course they have lots of advantages (a full-time job where they work closely with most of the existing maintainers to learn everything they need to publicly demonstrate their fitness for the role), but it makes it clear that the maintainership of Ubuntu is driven by Ubuntu and not by managers at Canonical.

worik 7y ago

RMS is a difficult person. Anybody who has had anything to do with him knows that. But he is also (relatively) a old person. He comes from a era when to get heard you had to shout. His generation turned out a lot of well intentioned, but bullying, people. We are much more inclusive these days, we make efforts to broaden the appeal of our groups and ensure that people other than the usual alphas can function in them. But in that process we have become intolerant of the shouty bullying men (usually men, but not always) of old. This is mostly good. But for RMS and Linus and lots of others of the old guard there is a difficult adjustment. It is OK to have opinions. It is OK to express them. But what RMS and co. (me too, I had to, I am the same generation) had to, have to, learn is that we need to always speak our opinions softly. Because those who are "weaker" personalities than us view our shouted opinions as a affront. And if we want them in our groups, and I know I do, we have to accommodate them. It seems RMS is stepping out of the way. I know Linus did. Any takers for a sweepstake on when Theo de Raadt will?

hollerith 7y ago
>It seems RMS is stepping out of the way. I know Linus did. When and how did Linus step out of the way? Are you referring to this event (quoting Wikipedia): >On Sunday, September 16, 2018 the Linux Kernel Code of Conflict was suddenly replaced by a new Code of Conduct based on the Contributor Covenant. Shortly thereafter, in the release notes for Linux 4.19-rc4, Linus apologized for his behavior, calling the personal attacks of the past "unprofessional and uncalled for" and announced a period of "time off" to "get some assistance on how to understand people's emotions and respond appropriately". It soon transpired that these events followed The New Yorker approaching Linus with a series of questions critical of his conduct. Following the release of Linux 4.19 on October 22, Linus went back to maintaining the kernel.
- worik 7y ago
  Yes. That would be what I meant. I'm hazy on the details thanks for the extra information

kragen 7y ago

When I was 17, I started dating the woman who I married when I was 20. She was older than I was, so it's fairly horrifying to me to see people publicly equating "pedophilia" with "sex between adults and teenagers". It makes my old wounds ache to see respected community leaders like Andy Wingo publicly accusing her of pedophilia and, implicitly, of abusive behavior, promoting the unwarranted social stigma we had to struggle against for the entire duration of our relationship. Although we were only intimate partners for seven years, the relationship was not in any way a matter of her taking advantage of me or abusing me. The relationship changed my life dramatically for the better, and I still love her, even though it has been some years since we last saw each other. I thank God I lived in New Mexico, where the age of consent was low enough to protect her from legal risks in addition to the social ostracism she did suffer. To state my position clearly, there is nothing wrong with sexual relationships between adults and older teenagers. It is not a result of pedophilia, nor is that situation inherently abusive. It does require special attention to issues of inequality of power stemming from economic and social differences, as well as the special difficulties faced by any relationship involving teenagers or people in their early twenties stemming from inexperience and higher levels of impulsivity. Of course, the relationship that provoked this controversy had nothing of this egalitarian character. According to the account of Virginia Giuffre, the victim, she was enslaved by serial rapist Jeffrey Epstein, who preyed on teenagers precisely because of their economic and psychological vulnerability; he ordered her to have sex with a variety of men who were presumably unaware of her enslavement. Her obedient efforts at seducing Stallman’s friend Marvin Minsky included accompanying him on travel around the country, but she has not alleged that they actually had sex or that he knew of her enslavement. Physicist Gregory Benford testified to observing Minsky reject Giuffre’s advances. Epstein may have had an additional motive for preying on teenagers: he maintained a large library of surreptitious video recordings of famous men having sex with enslaved underage women. There is evidence that Epstein was working for the US Intelligence Community; prosecutor Acosta accepted an unconscionable level of impunity as a result. Stallman defending his dead friend Minsky from wholly unfounded allegations of “sexual assault” on the basis of the above facts is what provoked the current controversy. I find it profoundly appalling to see people like Andy Wingo equating people like my beloved first wife to perpetrators of atrocities like Jeffrey Epstein, asserting that the most important fact about our relationship is that I, like Giuffre, was 17 years old when it began.

vfclists 7y ago

I think Andy Wingo issues with GNU should be more focused on his RMS management style and not his political or social views. But it is clear that a number of people involved in the GNU projects have had issues with the management style and personality of RMS quite separate from his non-conformist views raising views on sexual mores. Andy Wingo focusing on his views relating to sex risks turning one thing into another. He should just focus on the management issues within GNU projects and ignore the unconventional sexual views. The Epstein case shouldn't be an excuse or a rationale for focusing on the leadership of RMS. Having RMS as the leader of the GNU project is like having mildly eccentric relatives, especially parents. You just have to live with them.