4 ms·

It does not matter if rms is a nice person or not. He didn't do anything criminal, his only offense is stoically and pedantically expressing his views, unyieldi

It does not matter if rms is a nice person or not. He didn't do anything criminal, his only offense is stoically and pedantically expressing his views, unyielding to public pressure. In other words, displaying those very qualities that helped him change software development forever. People should not be destroyed for not being nice enough to certain individuals prone to offenses, and conforming to someone else's views should not be a necessity to work in your chosen field.

SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
Not having a board position isn’t anything close to being destroyed. I’m totally against heavily exaggerating everything RMS did wrong but can we not swing the other way around and equivocate a highly privileged position with life and livelihood?
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  Pushing a person from his life's work and from the organization that exists only because of him is effectively destroying. This won't stop with him resigning again. What do you think, this mad cancel mob will tolerate rms to appear at some Libre Software conference? Hell, no! They'll harass organizers till they quit, threatening with boycott and pressuring all the sponsors and venue providers. We've seen this in action many times. This mob must be stopped.
iSnow 6y ago
Then again, if you are of a divisive personality type, you maybe should not lead an organization as others might not want to work with you, companies might want to withdraw funding because they don't like to be associated with the controversy around you. And lastly, you might reduce the reach of your own ideas.
- mpol 6y ago
  Or maybe other people are divisive and want to destroy or compromise the FSF?
  - iSnow 6y ago
    Maybe, but I've yet have anyone describe Stallman as empathetic or integrative. Given the choice between believing multiple persons and orgs have a hidden agenda or believing them, I choose the latter unless I am given good reasons for the first.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
      He had come up with a set of principles that defined the Free Software, and created a worldwide movement that consists of dosens of thousands of developers,most of the time being vilified and ridiculed and FUDed by some of the biggest corporations on the planet. (And all this time strictly following his own moral code and never trading freedom for convenience) I'd say he has the very set of traits that allowed him to achieve the impossible and change the world for the better, immensely. But now some random people not known for anything but their activism also want him to be niiiiiiice, or else they'll cancel him. To hell with that!!
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  Did it ever occur to you that having an agreeable and nice personality is not quite what is needed to bring forth the ideas of free software movement? It is not like Stallman wasn't effective in this role - everyone in this thread was reached by his ideas in different ways. People from all over the world have heard of Free Software, joined the movement, have built a lot of applications, but apparently all some people need is for him to also be nice. I guees it is never enough for some people.
Qwertious 6y ago
>It does not matter if rms is a nice person or not. If it impacts his effectiveness in leading the FSF, then it absolutely does matter. If he's abrasive, then nobody will want to work with him, and by extension people won't want to work with the FSF. We shouldn't have to play this politically-correct bullshit game of tiptoe: Richard Stallman's social skills are shit, and saying that he's not well suited to a people-facing role is not some attack on him. >conforming to someone else's views should not be a necessity to work in your chosen field. It sounds like you don't know the difference between bootlicking and subtlety. While the face of the FSF being unyielding on Free Software is generally good, the face of the FSF being unyielding on,say, nosefucking with plants is less so.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  > If it impacts his effectiveness in leading the FSF, then it absolutely does matter. He founded the damn thing. Let him lead the way he likes it. So far, he was quite successful in carrying with the organization's mission. If you don't like the way he runs FSF, you can start your own foundation right now. No?
  - Qwertious 6y ago
    >He founded the damn thing. Let him lead the way he likes it. So far, he was quite successful in carrying with the organization's mission. My mistake, I missed the part where he declared himself dictator for life. Or the part where I declared I'd support him even if I thought he wasn't a good choice for the job. Yes, he did such wonderful work on GCC direction or that abortion joke he banned people from removing from documentation. Anyways, what FSF-approved distro has successfully gained notable market share in any consumer market? Ubuntu is more open-source than Free Software, considering e.g. people like to play Steam games on their AMD cards with nonfree microcode (actually 55% of gamers use Nvidia-proprietary IIRC). The Free Software community did a whole lot of good work, and I'm sure you've read the paper that proves it was literally all due to Richard Stallman, who by the way was the sole inventor of the concept of sharing software. >If you don't like the way he runs FSF, you can start your own foundation right now. No? Aw shit, that'd be a mess - we'd have to replace the GPLv3 with a license that gives someone else stewardship over GPL3'd (or whatever we call the new license) IP.
rich_sasha 6y ago
FWIW this is broadly my own opinion too. I’m trying to go beyond this debate, it’s all been said by now. Sometimes we don’t have pretty choices, and doing something we are fully entitled to do has adverse consequences regardless. I’m wondering if RMS, while being in his right, ended up avoidably sabotaging his own cause.
DanBC 6y ago
> He didn't do anything criminal, Not breaking the law is the bare knuckle minimum standard that we expect. Imagine going to a job interview and when asked about your achievements you say "well, I didn't break any laws".
- rich_sasha 6y ago
  It's kind of the other way around here. RMS: "Well I invented the free software movement, did a lot of badass things for open source etc." Interviewer: "What about personal hobbies?" RMS: "I write unpopular opinions on my personal blog and express them in ways that annoy people" Is this enough of a reason to not hire someone?
  - DanBC 6y ago
    > Is this enough of a reason to not hire someone? 1) Yes, when most of the job is public facing. 2) That's emphatically not only what he's accused of. He's accused actions in the workplace while carrying out his official business. Imagine being 18 and going to a conference and a 50 year old bloke gives you a "pleasure card". https://twitter.com/tihxu/status/463691653035745280?s=20 https://twitter.com/tihxu/status/463691653035745280?s=20 sharing good books, good food and exotic music and dance tender embraces unusual sense of humour Richard Stallman
    - prepend 6y ago
      > 1) Yes, when most of the job is public facing. That’s no good. In open source projects all commits are public facing. All developers give talks at meetups and cons. If this is the standard we’ll have then we’ll end up in a worse place. RMS is back on the board, amongst many. He’s not the chairman, he doesn’t represent the whole org. He’s just one person, part of an organization trying to promote free software.
      - DanBC 6y ago
        Maybe you just need to avoid management, which frequently requires people to toe a corporate line.

SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago

Not having a board position isn’t anything close to being destroyed. I’m totally against heavily exaggerating everything RMS did wrong but can we not swing the other way around and equivocate a highly privileged position with life and livelihood?

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
Pushing a person from his life's work and from the organization that exists only because of him is effectively destroying. This won't stop with him resigning again. What do you think, this mad cancel mob will tolerate rms to appear at some Libre Software conference? Hell, no! They'll harass organizers till they quit, threatening with boycott and pressuring all the sponsors and venue providers. We've seen this in action many times. This mob must be stopped.

iSnow 6y ago

Then again, if you are of a divisive personality type, you maybe should not lead an organization as others might not want to work with you, companies might want to withdraw funding because they don't like to be associated with the controversy around you. And lastly, you might reduce the reach of your own ideas.

mpol 6y ago
Or maybe other people are divisive and want to destroy or compromise the FSF?
- iSnow 6y ago
  Maybe, but I've yet have anyone describe Stallman as empathetic or integrative. Given the choice between believing multiple persons and orgs have a hidden agenda or believing them, I choose the latter unless I am given good reasons for the first.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
    He had come up with a set of principles that defined the Free Software, and created a worldwide movement that consists of dosens of thousands of developers,most of the time being vilified and ridiculed and FUDed by some of the biggest corporations on the planet. (And all this time strictly following his own moral code and never trading freedom for convenience) I'd say he has the very set of traits that allowed him to achieve the impossible and change the world for the better, immensely. But now some random people not known for anything but their activism also want him to be niiiiiiice, or else they'll cancel him. To hell with that!!
Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
Did it ever occur to you that having an agreeable and nice personality is not quite what is needed to bring forth the ideas of free software movement? It is not like Stallman wasn't effective in this role - everyone in this thread was reached by his ideas in different ways. People from all over the world have heard of Free Software, joined the movement, have built a lot of applications, but apparently all some people need is for him to also be nice. I guees it is never enough for some people.

Qwertious 6y ago

>It does not matter if rms is a nice person or not. If it impacts his effectiveness in leading the FSF, then it absolutely does matter. If he's abrasive, then nobody will want to work with him, and by extension people won't want to work with the FSF. We shouldn't have to play this politically-correct bullshit game of tiptoe: Richard Stallman's social skills are shit, and saying that he's not well suited to a people-facing role is not some attack on him. >conforming to someone else's views should not be a necessity to work in your chosen field. It sounds like you don't know the difference between bootlicking and subtlety. While the face of the FSF being unyielding on Free Software is generally good, the face of the FSF being unyielding on,say, nosefucking with plants is less so.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
> If it impacts his effectiveness in leading the FSF, then it absolutely does matter. He founded the damn thing. Let him lead the way he likes it. So far, he was quite successful in carrying with the organization's mission. If you don't like the way he runs FSF, you can start your own foundation right now. No?
- Qwertious 6y ago
  >He founded the damn thing. Let him lead the way he likes it. So far, he was quite successful in carrying with the organization's mission. My mistake, I missed the part where he declared himself dictator for life. Or the part where I declared I'd support him even if I thought he wasn't a good choice for the job. Yes, he did such wonderful work on GCC direction or that abortion joke he banned people from removing from documentation. Anyways, what FSF-approved distro has successfully gained notable market share in any consumer market? Ubuntu is more open-source than Free Software, considering e.g. people like to play Steam games on their AMD cards with nonfree microcode (actually 55% of gamers use Nvidia-proprietary IIRC). The Free Software community did a whole lot of good work, and I'm sure you've read the paper that proves it was literally all due to Richard Stallman, who by the way was the sole inventor of the concept of sharing software. >If you don't like the way he runs FSF, you can start your own foundation right now. No? Aw shit, that'd be a mess - we'd have to replace the GPLv3 with a license that gives someone else stewardship over GPL3'd (or whatever we call the new license) IP.

rich_sasha 6y ago

FWIW this is broadly my own opinion too. I’m trying to go beyond this debate, it’s all been said by now. Sometimes we don’t have pretty choices, and doing something we are fully entitled to do has adverse consequences regardless. I’m wondering if RMS, while being in his right, ended up avoidably sabotaging his own cause.

DanBC 6y ago

> He didn't do anything criminal, Not breaking the law is the bare knuckle minimum standard that we expect. Imagine going to a job interview and when asked about your achievements you say "well, I didn't break any laws".

rich_sasha 6y ago
It's kind of the other way around here. RMS: "Well I invented the free software movement, did a lot of badass things for open source etc." Interviewer: "What about personal hobbies?" RMS: "I write unpopular opinions on my personal blog and express them in ways that annoy people" Is this enough of a reason to not hire someone?
- DanBC 6y ago
  > Is this enough of a reason to not hire someone? 1) Yes, when most of the job is public facing. 2) That's emphatically not only what he's accused of. He's accused actions in the workplace while carrying out his official business. Imagine being 18 and going to a conference and a 50 year old bloke gives you a "pleasure card". https://twitter.com/tihxu/status/463691653035745280?s=20 https://twitter.com/tihxu/status/463691653035745280?s=20 sharing good books, good food and exotic music and dance tender embraces unusual sense of humour Richard Stallman
  - prepend 6y ago
    > 1) Yes, when most of the job is public facing. That’s no good. In open source projects all commits are public facing. All developers give talks at meetups and cons. If this is the standard we’ll have then we’ll end up in a worse place. RMS is back on the board, amongst many. He’s not the chairman, he doesn’t represent the whole org. He’s just one person, part of an organization trying to promote free software.
    - DanBC 6y ago
      Maybe you just need to avoid management, which frequently requires people to toe a corporate line.