4 ms·

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 s

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.

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.