3 ms·

My opinion is the opposite of yours - I like RMS immensely, but believe he's no longer fit to represent free software. The article that changed my mind [1] stat

by MikeUt 5y ago

My opinion is the opposite of yours - I like RMS immensely, but believe he's no longer fit to represent free software. The article that changed my mind [1] stated that, in short, making public statements on controversial topics unrelated to free software is harmful to the FSF's mission, regardless of how correct those statements may be. [1] http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html

Grustaf 5y ago
It seems that this statement by Stallman is what upsets him the most: "Sexual assault: this term is so broad that using it is misleading. The term includes rape, groping, sexual harassment, and other acts. These acts are not merely different in degree. They are different in kind. Rape is a grave crime. Being groped is unpleasant but not as grave as robbery. Sexual harassment is a not an action at all, but rather a pattern of actions that constitutes economic unfairness. How can it make sense to group these behaviors things together? It never makes sense. News articles, studies, and laws should avoid that term." That doesn't seem very controversial or upsetting, and even when he does say things I think are upsetting, how is that related to him promoting free software? As long as he obeys the laws I don't care if he would actually like to change them. The greater questions is: Why exactly do we need everyone to agree with our own morals? Isn't that the exact opposite of democracy? Especially in the US, which is a melting pot of people from various cultures, isn't the whole point that people should be able to have whatever morals they want, but everyone needs to obey the laws, and then every few years people vote on what the rules should be?
- MikeUt 5y ago
  Ideologically, I agree with you, and passionately agree with that statement on the "sexual assault" term. > and even when he does say things I think are upsetting, how is that related to him promoting free software? The sad fact is many people are unable (and sometimes unwilling) to separate a cause from its proponents. Every (misquoted) controversial statement he makes is ammo for opponents of free software to tar the entire movement with. I agree, his opinions on unrelated topics shouldn't matter, and we should strive to progress society to a level where they don't, but we're not there yet. We're not even close, if we're even moving in the right direction.
  - bopbeepboop 5y ago
    You’re arguing we should move further in the wrong direction.

by MikeUt 5y ago

Grustaf 5y ago

It seems that this statement by Stallman is what upsets him the most: "Sexual assault: this term is so broad that using it is misleading. The term includes rape, groping, sexual harassment, and other acts. These acts are not merely different in degree. They are different in kind. Rape is a grave crime. Being groped is unpleasant but not as grave as robbery. Sexual harassment is a not an action at all, but rather a pattern of actions that constitutes economic unfairness. How can it make sense to group these behaviors things together? It never makes sense. News articles, studies, and laws should avoid that term." That doesn't seem very controversial or upsetting, and even when he does say things I think are upsetting, how is that related to him promoting free software? As long as he obeys the laws I don't care if he would actually like to change them. The greater questions is: Why exactly do we need everyone to agree with our own morals? Isn't that the exact opposite of democracy? Especially in the US, which is a melting pot of people from various cultures, isn't the whole point that people should be able to have whatever morals they want, but everyone needs to obey the laws, and then every few years people vote on what the rules should be?

MikeUt 5y ago
Ideologically, I agree with you, and passionately agree with that statement on the "sexual assault" term. > and even when he does say things I think are upsetting, how is that related to him promoting free software? The sad fact is many people are unable (and sometimes unwilling) to separate a cause from its proponents. Every (misquoted) controversial statement he makes is ammo for opponents of free software to tar the entire movement with. I agree, his opinions on unrelated topics shouldn't matter, and we should strive to progress society to a level where they don't, but we're not there yet. We're not even close, if we're even moving in the right direction.
- bopbeepboop 5y ago
  You’re arguing we should move further in the wrong direction.