7 ms·

“I am announcing my resignation from the FSF board”

45 points by Quanttek 6y ago

bondarchuk 6y ago
https://www.zdnet.com/article/return-of-stallman-to-fsf-sparks-outrage-among-open-source-and-free-software-leaders/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/return-of-stallman-to-fsf-spar... >Kat Walsh, a FSF board member and technology attorney tweeted, "for whatever it's worth, I did not support the decision to reinstate RMS. I made my arguments and placed my opposing vote; while I was glad I was able to do that I regret not being able to turn the decision the other way." I wonder what the next step will be in the corporate takeover of free software? If they're all just gonna leave that seems like a suspiciously good outcome.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ip34162 6y ago
  FOSS doesn't depend on the FSF Board. There are many in the FOSS community that want RMS removed. https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-pr... https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/23/outreachy-fsf/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/23/outreachy-fsf/ https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ . . Also the FSF members weren't made aware of RMS's comeback. That's shitty behaviour. https://twitter.com/fsf/status/1374399897558917128 https://twitter.com/fsf/status/1374399897558917128 . . Partial reasons as to why this is happening: [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21287006 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21287006 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20994216 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20994216 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26545420 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26545420 [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535789
  - bondarchuk 6y ago
    I don't believe those are the actual underlying reasons. This kind of smear campaign is just a means to an end. RMS is anti-corporate and pro end-user. Free software has turned out to be immensely useful for big corporations, but mostly because it's free, not because it empowers the end-user. You would expect leftists to be in favour of empowering the end-user, but evidently not. I think it's because RMS is an old-style anarchist type leftist, while these new social justice type leftists are rather authoritarian and allied to big corporations as such.
    - caeril 6y ago
      After seeing every single member of the Fortune 500 shill for BLM last summer, this analysis rings true. Corporate power doesn't care about black lives, as several of the most adamant BLM shills run business models predicated significantly on black lives dying in cobalt mines and/or the associated sectarian wars over resources, or on busting unions of largely African immigrant labor. Similarly, it's laughable to think that the FOSS community members who work for Apple, IBM, Amazon, Google, or anyone else on that list would give a single shit about some socially-inept guy making awkward passes at women while they quietly endorse whatever China feels like doing to the Uyghurs or Hong Kong dissidents, and quietly cover up the endless sexual harassment scandals of their own C-suites. It's never been about social justice. Social Justice is a convenient tool they've found to further entrench their naked power. Don't think for half a second that they wouldn't immediately ditch it to support Hitler Part Deux if their internal strategy analysis indicated that doing so would gain them more power, control, and profits.
      - verall 6y ago
        People act like BLM asked for the corporate shilling. They asked for police reform. Corporations saw a chance to sell a little bit of virtue signal to Middle America.
    - throw0101a 6y ago
      Contra: > The idea that someone who does enough "good work" earns a pass for inappropriate behaviour is pervasive, and fosters environments where abusers can prosper. People who hold this belief shouldn't be involved in running organisations. * https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1374093150101200896 https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1374093150101200896 Other folks who did a lot of philanthropy: Jeffrey Epstein, David Koch, the Sackler family (of opioid epidemic noterietay), Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes, Bill Cosby, Michael Pearson, Raj Rajaratnam, Bernard Madoff, Ken Lay (of Enron). * https://www.worth.com/the-10-most-toxic-philanthropists/ https://www.worth.com/the-10-most-toxic-philanthropists/ * https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/harvey-weinstein-bill-cosby-and-the-cloak-of-charity https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/harvey-weinstei...
  - jeegsy 6y ago
    Consensus is difficult to assess or believe when the price of dissent is so very high.
adenozine 6y ago
Good riddance? I'm tired of social culture spokespeople flogging technologists over the head Nobody can make a case that RMS is a swell guy, he's awful. Still, he's without a sliver of a doubt the single most influential activist for FOSS that there's ever been. Getting rid of polarization happens with one instance of forgiveness+rehabilitation at a time. You cant cancel your way to better culture.
- moron4hire 6y ago
  > he's without a sliver of a doubt the single most influential activist for FOSS that there's ever been. Maybe that's why it's not taken more seriously in industry.
- cehrlich 6y ago
  RMS's role in the FSF was president, and now Member of the Board of Directors. Sure this requires some technical skills, but the main factor is leadership and the ability to bring people together. If anyone believes that RMS is fit for that role, that says a lot about the state of FOSS.
  - mantas 6y ago
    What is bringing people together - RMS-style "we're here to code" or progressive "everything is politics"?
    - vsdawn 6y ago
      Indeed "we're here to code" is the winner. Anything else just turns software into high school popularity contests, and there are thousands of other organizations who cater to that.
      - geofft 6y ago
        It's kind of incredible that the position of "we're here to code" is being attributed to RMS. He strenuously fought against that position for so long. It's why he objected to accepting the term "open source," even though the open source movement was producing free software and vice versa. It's why he designed GCC in a way to make it hard to add proprietary add-ons and rejected changes to make it more modular, a change that would have fit better with a "we're here to code" mindset (and, in the end, a change that left it vulnerable to competition from LLVM). It's why he cares so much about using the term "GNU/Linux" instead of "Linux" - if we're just here to code, who cares about naming? It's why he advocates strong copyleft, even though weaker licenses are also acceptable for free software. See, for instance, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html : > Proprietary software developers, seeking to deny the free competition an important advantage, will try to convince authors not to contribute libraries to the GPL-covered collection. For example, they may appeal to the ego, promising “more users for this library” if we let them use the code in proprietary software products. Popularity is tempting, and it is easy for a library developer to rationalize the idea that boosting the popularity of that one library is what the community needs above all. If the GNU philosophy were "we're here to code," then that argument would be convincing. (And indeed there are and were many people taking a "we're here to code" view - DJB, for instance, who insisted that he didn't copyright his software and it didn't need a license and all talk of licensing was a distraction; people who put their software on GitHub without a license; people who use GitHub and other non-free services instead of taking a principled stand against them; etc. Stallman's activism stood in opposition to all of those views.)
swebs 6y ago
The idea of free software is a very libertarian one. You have freedom. Its the same ideology that drives concepts such as freedom of speech. It is not compatible at all with the authoritarianism that drives cancel culture. Maybe these people should get together and form their own authoritarian-left software foundation. Call it the People's Software Foundation or something. No Dang, I'm not being snarky. This is a legitimate suggestion.
- krapp 6y ago
  It's ironic that you're claiming free software isn't compatible with authoritarianism while suggesting that anyone who doesn't support the Great Leader isn't welcome and should voluntarily purge themselves from the movement.
  - toomim 6y ago
    RMS doesn't lead with authoritarianism. You're assuming that anyone who is in a position of leadership is an "authoritarian," but that's not what the word means.
    - krapp 6y ago
      You're purposely misinterpreting my comment, so this will be my only reply to you here. The authoritarianism is in the community, and the opinion held by many within it that one cannot be a member of the Free Software community and oppose the leadership of Richard Stallman or be critical of his behavior. Everyone who does so is regarded as a traitor, a shill working for the interests of the proprietary software establishment or a SJW spreading lies and false claims. I've already seen several comments calling for the removal of "the SJWs" from the movement, and praise for the community's intolerance of any view outside of its political orthodoxy.
  - swebs 6y ago
    That's a real stretch. "Voluntarily" and "authoritarianism" are opposites. But that's beside the point. I'm not saying anyone is unwelcome or should leave. In fact, I think it would be best if people could coexist in the same organization while agreeing to disagree. But the fact of the matter is that these people already resigning. So instead of just doing nothing after they resign or working for some company, they should create their own group that's more in line with their ideals.
dsr_ 6y ago
When an organization, that you have a leadership position in, does something that you believe is wrong, and you have failed at preventing it and correcting it, then resignation is an entirely appropriate option. Walsh has integrity.
- phkahler 6y ago
  He didn't say that in the tweets. If that's the case, I wouldn't call it integrity to gloss over it.
  - lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
    She. And she did explain her opposition to the reinstement of RMS on Tuesday: "For whatever it's worth, I did not support the decision to reinstate RMS. I made my arguments and placed my opposing vote; while I was glad I was able to do that I regret not being able to turn the decision the other way." https://twitter.com/mindspillage/status/1374448587388588037 https://twitter.com/mindspillage/status/1374448587388588037
- milanandreew 6y ago
  If thou art not a witch, then drowning is an entirely appropriate option. If you float, you have revealed yourself to be Satan/Stallman's spawn, and thou shalt be hanged.
- ekianjo 6y ago
  Using twitter to bitch at large about your former employer is integrity? Thats a new one.
  - lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
    Board of directors, not an employee. "FSF board members are not compensated for their board service, and are not permitted to receive any personal financial benefit from FSF funds or other assets." https://www.fsf.org/about/the-role-of-the-fsfs-board-of-directors https://www.fsf.org/about/the-role-of-the-fsfs-board-of-dire... It is completely reasonable for a member of a board of directors (or advisors or trustees) of a non-profit to resign if they think the non-profit is going in the wrong direction.
nairboon 6y ago
Can anybody share some context, as to why this person is resigning?
- echelon 6y ago
  The FSF invited Stallman back. It's become a fight internally and externally. Twitter is on fire with passionate debates on both sides of the issue. Lots of people asked the board to resign in protest lest they be deemed supporters of RMS, and now we're seeing the board members react publicly.
- cehrlich 6y ago
  I don't think Walsh has made an official statement of any sort about this. But the main controversy in the FSF right now is the reinstatement of Richard Stallman. Here's an article about the events that led to Stallman's resignation in 2019: [1] He has also been known to, for example, hand out "Fuck Me" cards to women he deems attractive at software conferences. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/09/richard-stallman-leaves-mit-after-controversial-remarks-on-rape/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/09/richard-stallman...
  - swebs 6y ago
    Is this the card you're describing? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEWlJXRWsAASHJw?format=jpg&name=small https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEWlJXRWsAASHJw?format=jpg&name=...
- austincheney 6y ago
  See Resignation from MIT and FSF https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman
mrkeen 6y ago
RMS is accused of having, expressing (and sometimes retracting) contentious viewpoints. Correct me if I'm wrong and you think he's been soliciting sexual favours and/or sniffing co-workers' chairs, etc. It seems pretty clearly 1A here. People love to bring up the mechanics of 1A ("Congress shall pass no law, etc.") and say that 1A hasn't been violated, but that really misses the point of it - namely that people can freely discuss the government and the laws.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
curtisblaine 6y ago
As always with RMS, this post has reached the front page, then it has been silently pushed off it. It will be in the next issue of https://rejected.substack.com/ https://rejected.substack.com/ - the newsletter / repository of stories prevented to reach the front page of HN.
- ktpsns 6y ago
  Interesting site. I can't follow the reasoning. How do you think posts are prevented from reaching the front page? Do you claim they did reach front page but were then ... magically deleted? Or got more downvotes? Or where just [flagged] by the admins?
  - curtisblaine 6y ago
    I track the front page every fixed interval and do a diff. Some of them get pushed off quickly (say < 30 minutes). I also track, secondarily, all the other stories with a lot of points and comments that don't get to the front page.
  - curtisblaine 6y ago
    To answer your other question: stories are pushed off the front page either by users flagging them or admins manually removing them. In any case, I'm interested in stories with a lot of activity that get thrown off the front page. I often find them insightful and it would be a pity if they were lost.
    - wayneftw 6y ago
      Lots of people like me use a different site to see stories. Personally I use hckrnews.com and I'm never even aware that something fell off the front page. Anyway, I think it's fine for admins to want us to give a topic a rest the day after a long and contentious thread. I don't think there's any kind of conspiracy here. The only reason I use a different site to see the list of stories is that it's a stable list (the posts never get re-ordered) and overall just a better UX with filtering and infinite scrolling that actually works well.
milanandreew 6y ago
How did the FSF imagine this would play out? The fact that RMS isn't really the kind of guy you want doing public relations work, combined with the cancel culture shitstorm that originally got him booted, should've been enough to make anyone think thrice before reappointing him.
rich_sasha 6y ago
I don’t know much more than superficial things about either FSF or RMS. I read the things he said, they sound reasonable, but very prone to misinterpretation. I won’t jump to his defence, I think not offending people even through their misunderstandings is a key skill in public speech. I do find it terrifying though how he is lynched for what is essentially rational and permissible speech in an ugly wrapper. I don’t know if I agree with him, but I sure have some opinions of mine that are not palatable to mainstream woke Twitter mobs. The idea that I couldn’t express them for fear of being cancelled sends shivers down my spine.
- gurleen_s 6y ago
  It’s not just the opinions he’s held (some of which are incredibly disgusting) but it’s also the things he’s done at MIT. I encourage you to read the stories [1] of those who have interacted with him. This isn’t “cancel culture gone mad”, this is a terrible person being held accountable for their actions. [1] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88 https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix...
- buisi 6y ago
  I don't really think he is as "irredeemable" as people make him out to be. He could rebrand like Linus, and do less of the things which appear to irritate people. He could run more controversial things through someone else before publishing it. They've already made their point that what he said / did wasn't acceptable two years ago.
- user-the-name 6y ago
  Maybe your first step before speaking up should be to go deepen your knowledge of the situation beyond "superficial".
- throw0101a 6y ago
  > I do find it terrifying though how he is lynched for what is essentially rational and permissible speech in an ugly wrapper. What he said in 2019 was basically the last straw for many people of behaviour that stretches back a decade or three: * https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88 https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix... He hasn't admitted to doing anything wrong, or feeling regret for any words/actions, and so the thinking is if he won't ask for forgiveness (?) then why should he be let back in?
martyvis 6y ago
Keith Packard (of X desktop fame) makes some great points on the problems of governance of the FSF in this week's FLOSS Weekly. He saw similar issues with the XFree86 organisation in the 1990s causing him and most of the developers to form X.org. https://twit.tv/shows/floss-weekly/episodes/622?autostart=false https://twit.tv/shows/floss-weekly/episodes/622?autostart=fa...
gurleen_s 6y ago
I genuinely cannot believe the number of people who are equating the actions of a private organization to authoritarianism and “cancel culture”. Is this not the free market working as intended? That the public has a voice in who/what succeeds?
- lpsignal 6y ago
  The public in general does not have a voice. If you defend Stallman directly under your real name, you will be canceled as a fellow traveler. In the cancel-rms petition everyone was posting under their real names. Being on that list probably has positive consequences for your career at Google or Microsoft. The keep-rms petition was full of pseudonyms, only people from Eastern Europe dared to post under their real names.
12ian34 6y ago
to all the Stallman supporters - sure he's a genius and sure, he created the FSF, but how can you advocate for someone to be in a very public leadership position, anywhere when they hold and publicise such deplorable and potentially harmful views on topics such as rape, misogyny and paedophilia? This isn't about freedom of speech, this is about avoiding setting a public example that these things are ok, which they absolutely are not.
- drcongo 6y ago
  Judging by your downvotes with no replies, the typical HN user finds your post much more worthy of suppression than RMS' pro-child-sex comments.
  - 12ian34 6y ago
    indeed ... I'd at least appreciate someone providing a challenge to what I'm saying. Surely, proper discourse on the topic is merited rather than suppression. I suppose downvoting is the easier way of disagreeing. I'm extremely open to being challenged - I don't personally know the guy and I don't know every detail.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

45 points by Quanttek 6y ago

https://www.zdnet.com/article/return-of-stallman-to-fsf-sparks-outrage-among-open-source-and-free-software-leaders/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/return-of-stallman-to-fsf-spar... >Kat Walsh, a FSF board member and technology attorney tweeted, "for whatever it's worth, I did not support the decision to reinstate RMS. I made my arguments and placed my opposing vote; while I was glad I was able to do that I regret not being able to turn the decision the other way." I wonder what the next step will be in the corporate takeover of free software? If they're all just gonna leave that seems like a suspiciously good outcome.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ip34162 6y ago
FOSS doesn't depend on the FSF Board. There are many in the FOSS community that want RMS removed. https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-pr... https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/23/outreachy-fsf/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/23/outreachy-fsf/ https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ . . Also the FSF members weren't made aware of RMS's comeback. That's shitty behaviour. https://twitter.com/fsf/status/1374399897558917128 https://twitter.com/fsf/status/1374399897558917128 . . Partial reasons as to why this is happening: [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21287006 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21287006 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20994216 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20994216 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26545420 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26545420 [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535789
- bondarchuk 6y ago
  I don't believe those are the actual underlying reasons. This kind of smear campaign is just a means to an end. RMS is anti-corporate and pro end-user. Free software has turned out to be immensely useful for big corporations, but mostly because it's free, not because it empowers the end-user. You would expect leftists to be in favour of empowering the end-user, but evidently not. I think it's because RMS is an old-style anarchist type leftist, while these new social justice type leftists are rather authoritarian and allied to big corporations as such.
  - caeril 6y ago
    After seeing every single member of the Fortune 500 shill for BLM last summer, this analysis rings true. Corporate power doesn't care about black lives, as several of the most adamant BLM shills run business models predicated significantly on black lives dying in cobalt mines and/or the associated sectarian wars over resources, or on busting unions of largely African immigrant labor. Similarly, it's laughable to think that the FOSS community members who work for Apple, IBM, Amazon, Google, or anyone else on that list would give a single shit about some socially-inept guy making awkward passes at women while they quietly endorse whatever China feels like doing to the Uyghurs or Hong Kong dissidents, and quietly cover up the endless sexual harassment scandals of their own C-suites. It's never been about social justice. Social Justice is a convenient tool they've found to further entrench their naked power. Don't think for half a second that they wouldn't immediately ditch it to support Hitler Part Deux if their internal strategy analysis indicated that doing so would gain them more power, control, and profits.
    - verall 6y ago
      People act like BLM asked for the corporate shilling. They asked for police reform. Corporations saw a chance to sell a little bit of virtue signal to Middle America.
  - throw0101a 6y ago
    Contra: > The idea that someone who does enough "good work" earns a pass for inappropriate behaviour is pervasive, and fosters environments where abusers can prosper. People who hold this belief shouldn't be involved in running organisations. * https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1374093150101200896 https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1374093150101200896 Other folks who did a lot of philanthropy: Jeffrey Epstein, David Koch, the Sackler family (of opioid epidemic noterietay), Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes, Bill Cosby, Michael Pearson, Raj Rajaratnam, Bernard Madoff, Ken Lay (of Enron). * https://www.worth.com/the-10-most-toxic-philanthropists/ https://www.worth.com/the-10-most-toxic-philanthropists/ * https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/harvey-weinstein-bill-cosby-and-the-cloak-of-charity https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/harvey-weinstei...
- jeegsy 6y ago
  Consensus is difficult to assess or believe when the price of dissent is so very high.

adenozine 6y ago

Good riddance? I'm tired of social culture spokespeople flogging technologists over the head Nobody can make a case that RMS is a swell guy, he's awful. Still, he's without a sliver of a doubt the single most influential activist for FOSS that there's ever been. Getting rid of polarization happens with one instance of forgiveness+rehabilitation at a time. You cant cancel your way to better culture.

moron4hire 6y ago
> he's without a sliver of a doubt the single most influential activist for FOSS that there's ever been. Maybe that's why it's not taken more seriously in industry.
cehrlich 6y ago
RMS's role in the FSF was president, and now Member of the Board of Directors. Sure this requires some technical skills, but the main factor is leadership and the ability to bring people together. If anyone believes that RMS is fit for that role, that says a lot about the state of FOSS.
- mantas 6y ago
  What is bringing people together - RMS-style "we're here to code" or progressive "everything is politics"?
  - vsdawn 6y ago
    Indeed "we're here to code" is the winner. Anything else just turns software into high school popularity contests, and there are thousands of other organizations who cater to that.
    - geofft 6y ago
      It's kind of incredible that the position of "we're here to code" is being attributed to RMS. He strenuously fought against that position for so long. It's why he objected to accepting the term "open source," even though the open source movement was producing free software and vice versa. It's why he designed GCC in a way to make it hard to add proprietary add-ons and rejected changes to make it more modular, a change that would have fit better with a "we're here to code" mindset (and, in the end, a change that left it vulnerable to competition from LLVM). It's why he cares so much about using the term "GNU/Linux" instead of "Linux" - if we're just here to code, who cares about naming? It's why he advocates strong copyleft, even though weaker licenses are also acceptable for free software. See, for instance, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html : > Proprietary software developers, seeking to deny the free competition an important advantage, will try to convince authors not to contribute libraries to the GPL-covered collection. For example, they may appeal to the ego, promising “more users for this library” if we let them use the code in proprietary software products. Popularity is tempting, and it is easy for a library developer to rationalize the idea that boosting the popularity of that one library is what the community needs above all. If the GNU philosophy were "we're here to code," then that argument would be convincing. (And indeed there are and were many people taking a "we're here to code" view - DJB, for instance, who insisted that he didn't copyright his software and it didn't need a license and all talk of licensing was a distraction; people who put their software on GitHub without a license; people who use GitHub and other non-free services instead of taking a principled stand against them; etc. Stallman's activism stood in opposition to all of those views.)

swebs 6y ago

The idea of free software is a very libertarian one. You have freedom. Its the same ideology that drives concepts such as freedom of speech. It is not compatible at all with the authoritarianism that drives cancel culture. Maybe these people should get together and form their own authoritarian-left software foundation. Call it the People's Software Foundation or something. No Dang, I'm not being snarky. This is a legitimate suggestion.

krapp 6y ago
It's ironic that you're claiming free software isn't compatible with authoritarianism while suggesting that anyone who doesn't support the Great Leader isn't welcome and should voluntarily purge themselves from the movement.
- toomim 6y ago
  RMS doesn't lead with authoritarianism. You're assuming that anyone who is in a position of leadership is an "authoritarian," but that's not what the word means.
  - krapp 6y ago
    You're purposely misinterpreting my comment, so this will be my only reply to you here. The authoritarianism is in the community, and the opinion held by many within it that one cannot be a member of the Free Software community and oppose the leadership of Richard Stallman or be critical of his behavior. Everyone who does so is regarded as a traitor, a shill working for the interests of the proprietary software establishment or a SJW spreading lies and false claims. I've already seen several comments calling for the removal of "the SJWs" from the movement, and praise for the community's intolerance of any view outside of its political orthodoxy.
- swebs 6y ago
  That's a real stretch. "Voluntarily" and "authoritarianism" are opposites. But that's beside the point. I'm not saying anyone is unwelcome or should leave. In fact, I think it would be best if people could coexist in the same organization while agreeing to disagree. But the fact of the matter is that these people already resigning. So instead of just doing nothing after they resign or working for some company, they should create their own group that's more in line with their ideals.

dsr_ 6y ago

When an organization, that you have a leadership position in, does something that you believe is wrong, and you have failed at preventing it and correcting it, then resignation is an entirely appropriate option. Walsh has integrity.

phkahler 6y ago
He didn't say that in the tweets. If that's the case, I wouldn't call it integrity to gloss over it.
- lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
  She. And she did explain her opposition to the reinstement of RMS on Tuesday: "For whatever it's worth, I did not support the decision to reinstate RMS. I made my arguments and placed my opposing vote; while I was glad I was able to do that I regret not being able to turn the decision the other way." https://twitter.com/mindspillage/status/1374448587388588037 https://twitter.com/mindspillage/status/1374448587388588037
milanandreew 6y ago
If thou art not a witch, then drowning is an entirely appropriate option. If you float, you have revealed yourself to be Satan/Stallman's spawn, and thou shalt be hanged.
ekianjo 6y ago
Using twitter to bitch at large about your former employer is integrity? Thats a new one.
- lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
  Board of directors, not an employee. "FSF board members are not compensated for their board service, and are not permitted to receive any personal financial benefit from FSF funds or other assets." https://www.fsf.org/about/the-role-of-the-fsfs-board-of-directors https://www.fsf.org/about/the-role-of-the-fsfs-board-of-dire... It is completely reasonable for a member of a board of directors (or advisors or trustees) of a non-profit to resign if they think the non-profit is going in the wrong direction.

nairboon 6y ago

Can anybody share some context, as to why this person is resigning?

echelon 6y ago
The FSF invited Stallman back. It's become a fight internally and externally. Twitter is on fire with passionate debates on both sides of the issue. Lots of people asked the board to resign in protest lest they be deemed supporters of RMS, and now we're seeing the board members react publicly.
cehrlich 6y ago
I don't think Walsh has made an official statement of any sort about this. But the main controversy in the FSF right now is the reinstatement of Richard Stallman. Here's an article about the events that led to Stallman's resignation in 2019: [1] He has also been known to, for example, hand out "Fuck Me" cards to women he deems attractive at software conferences. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/09/richard-stallman-leaves-mit-after-controversial-remarks-on-rape/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/09/richard-stallman...
- swebs 6y ago
  Is this the card you're describing? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEWlJXRWsAASHJw?format=jpg&name=small https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEWlJXRWsAASHJw?format=jpg&name=...
austincheney 6y ago
See Resignation from MIT and FSF https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

mrkeen 6y ago

RMS is accused of having, expressing (and sometimes retracting) contentious viewpoints. Correct me if I'm wrong and you think he's been soliciting sexual favours and/or sniffing co-workers' chairs, etc. It seems pretty clearly 1A here. People love to bring up the mechanics of 1A ("Congress shall pass no law, etc.") and say that 1A hasn't been violated, but that really misses the point of it - namely that people can freely discuss the government and the laws.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

curtisblaine 6y ago

As always with RMS, this post has reached the front page, then it has been silently pushed off it. It will be in the next issue of https://rejected.substack.com/ https://rejected.substack.com/ - the newsletter / repository of stories prevented to reach the front page of HN.

ktpsns 6y ago
Interesting site. I can't follow the reasoning. How do you think posts are prevented from reaching the front page? Do you claim they did reach front page but were then ... magically deleted? Or got more downvotes? Or where just [flagged] by the admins?
- curtisblaine 6y ago
  I track the front page every fixed interval and do a diff. Some of them get pushed off quickly (say < 30 minutes). I also track, secondarily, all the other stories with a lot of points and comments that don't get to the front page.
- curtisblaine 6y ago
  To answer your other question: stories are pushed off the front page either by users flagging them or admins manually removing them. In any case, I'm interested in stories with a lot of activity that get thrown off the front page. I often find them insightful and it would be a pity if they were lost.
  - wayneftw 6y ago
    Lots of people like me use a different site to see stories. Personally I use hckrnews.com and I'm never even aware that something fell off the front page. Anyway, I think it's fine for admins to want us to give a topic a rest the day after a long and contentious thread. I don't think there's any kind of conspiracy here. The only reason I use a different site to see the list of stories is that it's a stable list (the posts never get re-ordered) and overall just a better UX with filtering and infinite scrolling that actually works well.

milanandreew 6y ago

How did the FSF imagine this would play out? The fact that RMS isn't really the kind of guy you want doing public relations work, combined with the cancel culture shitstorm that originally got him booted, should've been enough to make anyone think thrice before reappointing him.

rich_sasha 6y ago

I don’t know much more than superficial things about either FSF or RMS. I read the things he said, they sound reasonable, but very prone to misinterpretation. I won’t jump to his defence, I think not offending people even through their misunderstandings is a key skill in public speech. I do find it terrifying though how he is lynched for what is essentially rational and permissible speech in an ugly wrapper. I don’t know if I agree with him, but I sure have some opinions of mine that are not palatable to mainstream woke Twitter mobs. The idea that I couldn’t express them for fear of being cancelled sends shivers down my spine.

gurleen_s 6y ago
It’s not just the opinions he’s held (some of which are incredibly disgusting) but it’s also the things he’s done at MIT. I encourage you to read the stories [1] of those who have interacted with him. This isn’t “cancel culture gone mad”, this is a terrible person being held accountable for their actions. [1] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88 https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix...
buisi 6y ago
I don't really think he is as "irredeemable" as people make him out to be. He could rebrand like Linus, and do less of the things which appear to irritate people. He could run more controversial things through someone else before publishing it. They've already made their point that what he said / did wasn't acceptable two years ago.
user-the-name 6y ago
Maybe your first step before speaking up should be to go deepen your knowledge of the situation beyond "superficial".
throw0101a 6y ago
> I do find it terrifying though how he is lynched for what is essentially rational and permissible speech in an ugly wrapper. What he said in 2019 was basically the last straw for many people of behaviour that stretches back a decade or three: * https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88 https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix... He hasn't admitted to doing anything wrong, or feeling regret for any words/actions, and so the thinking is if he won't ask for forgiveness (?) then why should he be let back in?

martyvis 6y ago

Keith Packard (of X desktop fame) makes some great points on the problems of governance of the FSF in this week's FLOSS Weekly. He saw similar issues with the XFree86 organisation in the 1990s causing him and most of the developers to form X.org. https://twit.tv/shows/floss-weekly/episodes/622?autostart=false https://twit.tv/shows/floss-weekly/episodes/622?autostart=fa...

gurleen_s 6y ago

I genuinely cannot believe the number of people who are equating the actions of a private organization to authoritarianism and “cancel culture”. Is this not the free market working as intended? That the public has a voice in who/what succeeds?

lpsignal 6y ago
The public in general does not have a voice. If you defend Stallman directly under your real name, you will be canceled as a fellow traveler. In the cancel-rms petition everyone was posting under their real names. Being on that list probably has positive consequences for your career at Google or Microsoft. The keep-rms petition was full of pseudonyms, only people from Eastern Europe dared to post under their real names.

12ian34 6y ago

to all the Stallman supporters - sure he's a genius and sure, he created the FSF, but how can you advocate for someone to be in a very public leadership position, anywhere when they hold and publicise such deplorable and potentially harmful views on topics such as rape, misogyny and paedophilia? This isn't about freedom of speech, this is about avoiding setting a public example that these things are ok, which they absolutely are not.

drcongo 6y ago
Judging by your downvotes with no replies, the typical HN user finds your post much more worthy of suppression than RMS' pro-child-sex comments.
- 12ian34 6y ago
  indeed ... I'd at least appreciate someone providing a challenge to what I'm saying. Surely, proper discourse on the topic is merited rather than suppression. I suppose downvoting is the easier way of disagreeing. I'm extremely open to being challenged - I don't personally know the guy and I don't know every detail.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]