4 ms·

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

by sildur 6y ago

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...
- alexvoda 6y ago
  About that: > We do. Plenty of developers fund FSFE, Conservancy, EFF and so on. This is FSFE's response: https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.en.html https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.en.html > We disapprove of this step that came without any message of remorse or willingness to change. > Therefore, in the current situation we see ourselves unable to collaborate both with the FSF and any other organisation in which Richard Stallman has a leading position.
knz_ 5y ago
> He represents me So you are saying that you support pedophilia.

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

by 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...
alexvoda 6y ago
About that: > We do. Plenty of developers fund FSFE, Conservancy, EFF and so on. This is FSFE's response: https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.en.html https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.en.html > We disapprove of this step that came without any message of remorse or willingness to change. > Therefore, in the current situation we see ourselves unable to collaborate both with the FSF and any other organisation in which Richard Stallman has a leading position.

knz_ 5y ago

> He represents me So you are saying that you support pedophilia.