7 ms·

I fully support RMS being on the FSF board for life. (I also think he would be fantastic making a cameo in a bit part in Disney's Mandalorian series, bitching

by mikece 6y ago

I fully support RMS being on the FSF board for life. (I also think he would be fantastic making a cameo in a bit part in Disney's Mandalorian series, bitching about "damned proprietary code" used in imperial droids that makes them hard to reprogram but that's another topic for another message board...)

phasnox 6y ago
I find it hard to support a guy that says stuff like this: "There is a perverse movement among women to think that they should carry fetuses with Downs' syndrome to term, rather than abort them and try again. ... Next, people will take thalidomide to demonstrate how they can love babies born without limbs." - RMS
- smoldesu 6y ago
  What does this have to do with his tenure on the FSF?
  - phasnox 6y ago
    Nothing at all. But I would understand if people that are part of the FSF would not like to associate with him.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - danans 6y ago
    Libre software, if it ever becomes the societal norm, is revolutionary in the traditional meaning of that word - turning over the societal order (vs. smartphones which haven't changed the existing societal order much at all), and if you are seeking to create a societal revolution, the words and actions of your leadership matter beyond the immediate domain of your movement. RMS may not have much in terms of money, but he has a lot of influence due to his stature in the libre software movement, and with influence comes responsibility and accountability to those in the movement he started.
    - smoldesu 6y ago
      Not really. It's the Free Software Foundation, not the Free People Foundation. Stallman's only goal has been to develop an ecosystem of free and open software, and his political and personal opinions have never stood in the way of that. His belief that everyone should have access to quality, open software supersedes whatever personal agenda people perceive to be true.
      - danans 6y ago
        > Stallman's only goal has been to develop an ecosystem of free and open software Why is his goal the only one that matters? Is he a prophet, or is he just a guy who created a compelling idea? Should the movement continue to be centered on him as a personality? The FSF movement is by definition far bigger than him, and it can reasonably contain other related goals. Perhaps those with other goals can make peace with keeping him around, perhaps they can't.
        DreamScatter 6y ago
        It's his foundation, and you are welcome to start your own foundation promoting your own ideals for software.
      - phasnox 6y ago
        Software is made by people.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ndr 6y ago
  You are, of course, free to choose who to support. Does "support RMS being on the FSF board for life" mean supporting him on everything he says, or even suggest supporting him for this quote?
  - tpush 6y ago
    Well, it means supporting the exclusion of every person that feels alienated by Stallman's behavior and publicly stated views. For as long as Stallman's alive. Irrespective of any moral or ethical concerns, keeping Stallman doesn't seem very pragmatic and forward-looking for an organization that is hurting for young blood anyway. A leader should be able to recognize when he's driving people away, and act accordingly.
    - Corazoor 6y ago
      This might be an unpopular opionion, but anyone who feels that Stallmans antics make him unfit for leading the FSF is also not someone I want have any say in that organizsation. It shows a lack of ability to discern between message and messanger, as well as private and professional opinion. He is the single most consistent arbiter of open source, clinging to views we all here admire; With such a dedication that it is hard to imagine ANYONE, even fictional, who would be better suited for that particular position (head of FSF). Aleniating people is in and of itself not a problem for a leader, it works the same way in any other area: Would you want to attract people to Black Lives Matter who would be alienated by Martin Luther King? Do you really find it problematic that the buddhists don't try to attract people who can't stand the Dalai Lama? Is it really a Problem that the FSF didn't attract people who would critizise Stallman ONLY on points which have no bearing on the mission of the FSF? And the article really makes a great point about how most of that criticism consists of misrepresentation, faulty analysis and double standards. Keeping people like that out of the FSF is not only fine by me, it is absolute paramount to keep it working.
      - angry_octet 6y ago
        Opinions like your are what has kept FSF stuck in 1990s obscurity. Enjoy alienating people and remaining irrelevant while everyone else moves on.
- junippor 6y ago
  Not tactful, but he has a point. Some people are just fundamentalists (with bad fundamentals).
- PurpleFoxy 6y ago
  He is saying what most people are thinking. How many people really do want to have a child with Down syndrome if it can be avoided?
  - angry_octet 6y ago
    It's an intensely person decision, and no one needs someone like RMS spouting on about what they should do. Once he's no longer involved with leading FSF/GNU he can blather along as much as he likes. This is the cherry on the top: "Next, people will take thalidomide to demonstrate how they can love babies born without limbs." I'm sure all the victims of thalidomide with be pleased at this mockery. FSF doesn't need a chode like RMS.
yabones 6y ago
Something tells me RMS would never in a million years work with Disney... He's been quite vocal against them for years. * https://stallman.org/notes/2020-jul-oct.html#23_September_2020_(Working_against_womens_rights) https://stallman.org/notes/2020-jul-oct.html#23_September_20... * https://www.stallman.org/archives/2021-jan-apr.html#18_February_2021_(Subsubsubcontracted_gig_workers) https://www.stallman.org/archives/2021-jan-apr.html#18_Febru... * https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-mar-jun.html#4_March_2018_(Disneyland_wages) https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-mar-jun.html#4_March_...
- smsm42 6y ago
  Yes, and him being in Disney movie earning money for Disney would only tarnish his image. But one can dream, that in an alternate universe, where pop culture is not wholly owned by reptiloid corporations, there could be the Mandalorian where RMS could play a droid technician muttering about damn proprietary code... and that'd be awesome.
gaws 6y ago
> I also think he would be fantastic making a cameo in a bit part in Disney's Mandalorian series The fact you actually want this is beyond cringe.
- tarboreus 6y ago
  Use of the word "cringe" is definitely the most "cringe" thing in this thread.

by mikece 6y ago

phasnox 6y ago

I find it hard to support a guy that says stuff like this: "There is a perverse movement among women to think that they should carry fetuses with Downs' syndrome to term, rather than abort them and try again. ... Next, people will take thalidomide to demonstrate how they can love babies born without limbs." - RMS

smoldesu 6y ago
What does this have to do with his tenure on the FSF?
- phasnox 6y ago
  Nothing at all. But I would understand if people that are part of the FSF would not like to associate with him.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- danans 6y ago
  Libre software, if it ever becomes the societal norm, is revolutionary in the traditional meaning of that word - turning over the societal order (vs. smartphones which haven't changed the existing societal order much at all), and if you are seeking to create a societal revolution, the words and actions of your leadership matter beyond the immediate domain of your movement. RMS may not have much in terms of money, but he has a lot of influence due to his stature in the libre software movement, and with influence comes responsibility and accountability to those in the movement he started.
  - smoldesu 6y ago
    Not really. It's the Free Software Foundation, not the Free People Foundation. Stallman's only goal has been to develop an ecosystem of free and open software, and his political and personal opinions have never stood in the way of that. His belief that everyone should have access to quality, open software supersedes whatever personal agenda people perceive to be true.
    - danans 6y ago
      > Stallman's only goal has been to develop an ecosystem of free and open software Why is his goal the only one that matters? Is he a prophet, or is he just a guy who created a compelling idea? Should the movement continue to be centered on him as a personality? The FSF movement is by definition far bigger than him, and it can reasonably contain other related goals. Perhaps those with other goals can make peace with keeping him around, perhaps they can't.
      - DreamScatter 6y ago
        It's his foundation, and you are welcome to start your own foundation promoting your own ideals for software.
    - phasnox 6y ago
      Software is made by people.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ndr 6y ago
You are, of course, free to choose who to support. Does "support RMS being on the FSF board for life" mean supporting him on everything he says, or even suggest supporting him for this quote?
- tpush 6y ago
  Well, it means supporting the exclusion of every person that feels alienated by Stallman's behavior and publicly stated views. For as long as Stallman's alive. Irrespective of any moral or ethical concerns, keeping Stallman doesn't seem very pragmatic and forward-looking for an organization that is hurting for young blood anyway. A leader should be able to recognize when he's driving people away, and act accordingly.
  - Corazoor 6y ago
    This might be an unpopular opionion, but anyone who feels that Stallmans antics make him unfit for leading the FSF is also not someone I want have any say in that organizsation. It shows a lack of ability to discern between message and messanger, as well as private and professional opinion. He is the single most consistent arbiter of open source, clinging to views we all here admire; With such a dedication that it is hard to imagine ANYONE, even fictional, who would be better suited for that particular position (head of FSF). Aleniating people is in and of itself not a problem for a leader, it works the same way in any other area: Would you want to attract people to Black Lives Matter who would be alienated by Martin Luther King? Do you really find it problematic that the buddhists don't try to attract people who can't stand the Dalai Lama? Is it really a Problem that the FSF didn't attract people who would critizise Stallman ONLY on points which have no bearing on the mission of the FSF? And the article really makes a great point about how most of that criticism consists of misrepresentation, faulty analysis and double standards. Keeping people like that out of the FSF is not only fine by me, it is absolute paramount to keep it working.
    - angry_octet 6y ago
      Opinions like your are what has kept FSF stuck in 1990s obscurity. Enjoy alienating people and remaining irrelevant while everyone else moves on.
junippor 6y ago
Not tactful, but he has a point. Some people are just fundamentalists (with bad fundamentals).
PurpleFoxy 6y ago
He is saying what most people are thinking. How many people really do want to have a child with Down syndrome if it can be avoided?
- angry_octet 6y ago
  It's an intensely person decision, and no one needs someone like RMS spouting on about what they should do. Once he's no longer involved with leading FSF/GNU he can blather along as much as he likes. This is the cherry on the top: "Next, people will take thalidomide to demonstrate how they can love babies born without limbs." I'm sure all the victims of thalidomide with be pleased at this mockery. FSF doesn't need a chode like RMS.

yabones 6y ago

Something tells me RMS would never in a million years work with Disney... He's been quite vocal against them for years. * https://stallman.org/notes/2020-jul-oct.html#23_September_2020_(Working_against_womens_rights) https://stallman.org/notes/2020-jul-oct.html#23_September_20... * https://www.stallman.org/archives/2021-jan-apr.html#18_February_2021_(Subsubsubcontracted_gig_workers) https://www.stallman.org/archives/2021-jan-apr.html#18_Febru... * https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-mar-jun.html#4_March_2018_(Disneyland_wages) https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-mar-jun.html#4_March_...

smsm42 6y ago
Yes, and him being in Disney movie earning money for Disney would only tarnish his image. But one can dream, that in an alternate universe, where pop culture is not wholly owned by reptiloid corporations, there could be the Mandalorian where RMS could play a droid technician muttering about damn proprietary code... and that'd be awesome.

gaws 6y ago

> I also think he would be fantastic making a cameo in a bit part in Disney's Mandalorian series The fact you actually want this is beyond cringe.

tarboreus 6y ago
Use of the word "cringe" is definitely the most "cringe" thing in this thread.