5 ms·

Free software advocates seek removal of Richard Stallman and entire FSF board

33 points by alsetmusic 6y ago

blueflow 6y ago
The open letter reads more like a denouncement of a defector by a North Korean newspaper. Calling people names in public ("transphobic", "misogynistic") is no acceptable mean to approach social conflict. I agree that some of RMS's behaviors are objectionable, but the Open Letter puts the bar even lower. In terms of removing bad behaviors from Open Source, this is a net loss.
- forgotmysn 6y ago
  calling people "transphobic" or "misogynistic" is almost as bad as being transphobic or misogynistic, huh?
  - blueflow 6y ago
    If the goal is to create a better world, don't react to evil with an equal evil, or you will just be part of the problem.
    - remram 6y ago
      Equal evil?
    - forgotmysn 6y ago
      there are some who believe that you can build a better world by creating new systems. and there are others that believe you build a better world by removing bad systems. both are valid. removing a transphobic, misogynistic, piece of shit from the FSF Board definitely improves the world, regardless of how you do it.
      - salawat 6y ago
        The removal of a bad system that does good without a better system to replace it is an evil in sheeps clothing. Furthermore, what's with the "misogynistic, transphobic piece of shit" malarkey? Is that just becoming the term du jour for "people I don't agree with" nowadays?
        remram 6y ago
        Obviously there is a difference between pointing out to someone there are being misogynistic or transphobic, and calling them a "piece of shit". If you are tacking this on to argue that calling out misogyny or transphobia is offensive, we are not arguing the same thing at all.
  - waterhouse 6y ago
    When "being transphobic" is used to mean "supports transgender people and custom pronouns but objects to one specific pronoun due to his interpretation of grammatical rules" (while a dictionary result for "transphobic" says "having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people"), then, yeah, "being transphobic" is not especially bad and arguably not bad at all. In which case it's quite easy for "making a false and professionally-damaging claim" to be worse than that. I'll also note the redirection rhetoric (the subject was a criticism of the open letter).
iujjkfjdkkdkf 6y ago
The title is a little misleading. Whether or not these people are "free software advocates", they appear to be more defined by their social justice cause, and seem to feel that this is more important than actually talking about free software. That is what I disagree with most, many of these causes are important, but none of them are the one true cause that we need to drop everything and attend to. If you're interested in equality issues, join such a cause, don't try to pretend you're interested in free software so you can co-opt that cause for your own purposes. Ironically, this kind of behavior actually does the most harm to the people involved in it. There are lots of examples of e.g. gay rights organizations being commandeered by other groups to try and champion their "more important" cause.
- forgotmysn 6y ago
  i think you're missing the point. the point isnt to distract from free software by promoting social justice. the point is that regardless of your org's aims or ambitions, ensuring that the leaders of said org are worthy of leadership is the point.
  - iujjkfjdkkdkf 6y ago
    "Worthy" I'm not sure about, but if you're talking about ensuring leaders are effective, I get it. But its something of a self fulfilling prophecy I think. If someone is so distracted / distracting because of issues unrelated to what should be their focus, they could be the best free software advocate imaginable but still not suitable for the job. But it's only because of people deciding that other issues are more important than the purported cause. So I don't disagree that agitators are able to render someone ineffective at their job and unable to lead, but I don't think its right.
  - salawat 6y ago
    What makes a leader worthy exactly, moreso than leading? Half the complaints people have about Stallman aren't even grounded in fact. They all stem from a media hit piece, that resulted out of someone's hysterics because they failed at reading comprehension in one of the most spectacular fashions possible.
alsetmusic 6y ago
The actual open letter: https://rms-open-letter.github.io https://rms-open-letter.github.io
pasttense01 6y ago
FSF is a tiny organization with only a dozen or so employees. It would be very easy when you have all these free software advocates to simply set up a competing organization.

33 points by alsetmusic 6y ago

The open letter reads more like a denouncement of a defector by a North Korean newspaper. Calling people names in public ("transphobic", "misogynistic") is no acceptable mean to approach social conflict. I agree that some of RMS's behaviors are objectionable, but the Open Letter puts the bar even lower. In terms of removing bad behaviors from Open Source, this is a net loss.

forgotmysn 6y ago
calling people "transphobic" or "misogynistic" is almost as bad as being transphobic or misogynistic, huh?
- blueflow 6y ago
  If the goal is to create a better world, don't react to evil with an equal evil, or you will just be part of the problem.
  - remram 6y ago
    Equal evil?
  - forgotmysn 6y ago
    there are some who believe that you can build a better world by creating new systems. and there are others that believe you build a better world by removing bad systems. both are valid. removing a transphobic, misogynistic, piece of shit from the FSF Board definitely improves the world, regardless of how you do it.
    - salawat 6y ago
      The removal of a bad system that does good without a better system to replace it is an evil in sheeps clothing. Furthermore, what's with the "misogynistic, transphobic piece of shit" malarkey? Is that just becoming the term du jour for "people I don't agree with" nowadays?
      - remram 6y ago
        Obviously there is a difference between pointing out to someone there are being misogynistic or transphobic, and calling them a "piece of shit". If you are tacking this on to argue that calling out misogyny or transphobia is offensive, we are not arguing the same thing at all.
- waterhouse 6y ago
  When "being transphobic" is used to mean "supports transgender people and custom pronouns but objects to one specific pronoun due to his interpretation of grammatical rules" (while a dictionary result for "transphobic" says "having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people"), then, yeah, "being transphobic" is not especially bad and arguably not bad at all. In which case it's quite easy for "making a false and professionally-damaging claim" to be worse than that. I'll also note the redirection rhetoric (the subject was a criticism of the open letter).

iujjkfjdkkdkf 6y ago

The title is a little misleading. Whether or not these people are "free software advocates", they appear to be more defined by their social justice cause, and seem to feel that this is more important than actually talking about free software. That is what I disagree with most, many of these causes are important, but none of them are the one true cause that we need to drop everything and attend to. If you're interested in equality issues, join such a cause, don't try to pretend you're interested in free software so you can co-opt that cause for your own purposes. Ironically, this kind of behavior actually does the most harm to the people involved in it. There are lots of examples of e.g. gay rights organizations being commandeered by other groups to try and champion their "more important" cause.

forgotmysn 6y ago
i think you're missing the point. the point isnt to distract from free software by promoting social justice. the point is that regardless of your org's aims or ambitions, ensuring that the leaders of said org are worthy of leadership is the point.
- iujjkfjdkkdkf 6y ago
  "Worthy" I'm not sure about, but if you're talking about ensuring leaders are effective, I get it. But its something of a self fulfilling prophecy I think. If someone is so distracted / distracting because of issues unrelated to what should be their focus, they could be the best free software advocate imaginable but still not suitable for the job. But it's only because of people deciding that other issues are more important than the purported cause. So I don't disagree that agitators are able to render someone ineffective at their job and unable to lead, but I don't think its right.
- salawat 6y ago
  What makes a leader worthy exactly, moreso than leading? Half the complaints people have about Stallman aren't even grounded in fact. They all stem from a media hit piece, that resulted out of someone's hysterics because they failed at reading comprehension in one of the most spectacular fashions possible.

alsetmusic 6y ago

The actual open letter: https://rms-open-letter.github.io https://rms-open-letter.github.io

pasttense01 6y ago

FSF is a tiny organization with only a dozen or so employees. It would be very easy when you have all these free software advocates to simply set up a competing organization.