5 ms·

> The purpose of the FSF isn't protecting children The purpose of FSF and RMS as a spokeperson/leader is to represent a movement and the people behind it. You

> The purpose of the FSF isn't protecting children The purpose of FSF and RMS as a spokeperson/leader is to represent a movement and the people behind it. You cannot represent *me* if you: - make all sort of "weird" remarks about age of consent - brush off any sincere question or constructive criticism for decades - systematically walk up to every young woman in a conference to ask her out - throw temper tantrums for being offered a can of coke at a conference - show up at conferences improperly dressed, barefoot, pick from your feet and eat some bits - show up at public dinner with a strong body odor > The purpose of the FSF is free software. Not people's feelings. The behavior as a PUBLIC speaker affect the credibility of the WHOLE movement in the eyes of the world. It's only rational not to support a bad public speaker.

foobar33333 6y ago
Stallman did not show up barefoot. He took his shoes off in the middle of his speech.
sildur 6y ago
> You cannot represent me if you: He represents me, and many more. You can go fund another movement, if you feel attacked.
- goodpoint 6y ago
  > You can go fund another movement We do. Plenty of developers fund FSFE, Conservancy, EFF and so on. That does not take away the validity of the complains about RMS as a spokeperson. He admits it himself: https://www.fsf.org/news/rms-addresses-the-free-software-community https://www.fsf.org/news/rms-addresses-the-free-software-com... > if you are so sensitive. No need for snark. It's not a matter of my personal taste. Being a public speaker requires understanding how to fit the expectation of the majority of the audience, including politicians, companies (managers and businessman), IP lawyers, journalists, and all sort of non-technical people. It is difficult to support FLOSS in the workplace and in society when people associate it with RMS: "that's the stuff that weird guy talks about".
  - sildur 6y ago
    > We do. Plenty of developers fund FSFE, Conservancy, EFF and so on. Then carry on. Obviously the Free Software movement is not your cup of tea. You will probably feel more comfortable in the OSS movement. More business oriented. > No need for snark. It's not a matter of my personal taste. But it is. He offends your sensibilities. Not mine. Not other people's. > It is difficult to support FLOSS in the workplace and in society when people associate it with RMS: "that's the stuff that weird guy talks about". As it should be. The fact you are mixing open source with free software, and then complain it's not business friendly shows you are missing the point. Free software doesn't have to be business friendly. The final objective of the free software movement is that eventually everything becomes free software. All software. That is something current business doesn't find very friendly. Which is their problem. They will have to adapt or disappear.
    - alexvoda 6y ago
      >> We do. Plenty of developers fund FSFE, Conservancy, EFF and so on. > Then carry on. Obviously the Free Software movement is not your cup of tea. You will probably feel more comfortable in the OSS movement. More business oriented. I find it interesting that you consider FSFE and SFC as irelevant to Free Software and sugest OSS. Goodpoint did not suggest the OSI. Why do you bring forwared the whole free vs open source discussion? I would say in recent times SFC has done a lot more for free software than the FSF. Name one thing of note that the FSF has done in the last decade.
      - sildur 6y ago
        > I find it interesting that you consider FSFE and SFC as irelevant to Free Software and sugest OSS. FSFE is using the FSF name without authorization and also are accepting Microsoft's money which is at least questionable[1] It is also a very toxic working place, but that has nothing to do with Free Software[2] [1] http://techrights.org/2020/08/22/fsf-fsfe-dispute/ http://techrights.org/2020/08/22/fsf-fsfe-dispute/ [2] https://fsfellowship.eu/court-case-fsfe-women-and-volunteers-face-modern-day-slavery/ https://fsfellowship.eu/court-case-fsfe-women-and-volunteers...
  - 6y ago
- knz_ 6y ago
  > He represents me So you are saying that you support pedophilia.
dragonsngoblins 6y ago
> The purpose of FSF and RMS as a spokeperson/leader is to represent a movement and the people behind it. You mean purpose of FSF and RMS as a spokeperson/leader is to represent a movement and the the views of the people behind it in regards to software. This is a subtle but important distinction.

foobar33333 6y ago

Stallman did not show up barefoot. He took his shoes off in the middle of his speech.

sildur 6y ago

> You cannot represent me if you: He represents me, and many more. You can go fund another movement, if you feel attacked.

goodpoint 6y ago
> You can go fund another movement We do. Plenty of developers fund FSFE, Conservancy, EFF and so on. That does not take away the validity of the complains about RMS as a spokeperson. He admits it himself: https://www.fsf.org/news/rms-addresses-the-free-software-community https://www.fsf.org/news/rms-addresses-the-free-software-com... > if you are so sensitive. No need for snark. It's not a matter of my personal taste. Being a public speaker requires understanding how to fit the expectation of the majority of the audience, including politicians, companies (managers and businessman), IP lawyers, journalists, and all sort of non-technical people. It is difficult to support FLOSS in the workplace and in society when people associate it with RMS: "that's the stuff that weird guy talks about".
- sildur 6y ago
  > We do. Plenty of developers fund FSFE, Conservancy, EFF and so on. Then carry on. Obviously the Free Software movement is not your cup of tea. You will probably feel more comfortable in the OSS movement. More business oriented. > No need for snark. It's not a matter of my personal taste. But it is. He offends your sensibilities. Not mine. Not other people's. > It is difficult to support FLOSS in the workplace and in society when people associate it with RMS: "that's the stuff that weird guy talks about". As it should be. The fact you are mixing open source with free software, and then complain it's not business friendly shows you are missing the point. Free software doesn't have to be business friendly. The final objective of the free software movement is that eventually everything becomes free software. All software. That is something current business doesn't find very friendly. Which is their problem. They will have to adapt or disappear.
  - alexvoda 6y ago
    >> We do. Plenty of developers fund FSFE, Conservancy, EFF and so on. > Then carry on. Obviously the Free Software movement is not your cup of tea. You will probably feel more comfortable in the OSS movement. More business oriented. I find it interesting that you consider FSFE and SFC as irelevant to Free Software and sugest OSS. Goodpoint did not suggest the OSI. Why do you bring forwared the whole free vs open source discussion? I would say in recent times SFC has done a lot more for free software than the FSF. Name one thing of note that the FSF has done in the last decade.
    - sildur 6y ago
      > I find it interesting that you consider FSFE and SFC as irelevant to Free Software and sugest OSS. FSFE is using the FSF name without authorization and also are accepting Microsoft's money which is at least questionable[1] It is also a very toxic working place, but that has nothing to do with Free Software[2] [1] http://techrights.org/2020/08/22/fsf-fsfe-dispute/ http://techrights.org/2020/08/22/fsf-fsfe-dispute/ [2] https://fsfellowship.eu/court-case-fsfe-women-and-volunteers-face-modern-day-slavery/ https://fsfellowship.eu/court-case-fsfe-women-and-volunteers...
- 6y ago
knz_ 6y ago
> He represents me So you are saying that you support pedophilia.

dragonsngoblins 6y ago

> The purpose of FSF and RMS as a spokeperson/leader is to represent a movement and the people behind it. You mean purpose of FSF and RMS as a spokeperson/leader is to represent a movement and the the views of the people behind it in regards to software. This is a subtle but important distinction.