22 ms·
Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board
- nextaccountic 6y agoWhat does this graph means?
- branon 6y agoI found this to explain things a little better: https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_rms/results.txt https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_rms/results.txt
- madars 6y agoDebian uses the Condorcet method for elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method . Each voter is to rank a subset of all options, and this is the resulting pairwise preference graph.
- nextaccountic 6y agoIf it's the pairwise preference, shouldn't it be a complete graph? (a graph with edges between any two nodes)
- kroeckx 6y agoThe code does not draw lines between the options that didn't pass the quorum or majority test (drawn in pink), because they are dropped before the Schulze method is used. But it then adds the options again, to show all the options. When multiple options are in the Schwartz set, the weakest defeats are removed until only 1 option is left in the Schwartz set. I think it only draws the graph after there is only 1 option left. But that didn't happen in this vote.
- dragonwriter 6y agoI think (I’m not sure) its pairwiss preferences excluding those consistent with transitive preferences. ( so if A > B and B > C, the A to C preference is omitted.)
- arendtio 6y agoThanks, that explains a lot. I was kinda confused by the complexity of the results, but if it is about ranks, it all makes sense now :-)
- cyb_ 6y agoDupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26851694 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26851694
- nextaccountic 6y agoPerhaps the threads can be merged?
- cyb_ 6y agoThe other link is also a lot more detailed.
- Pfhreak 6y agoIf you look at the results they link, the picture becomes clearer. They proposed 8 options. 2 directly called for resignations at FSF, 2 directly supported RMS, one said to stop working with FSF, one said to call for governance improvements at FSF, one was no comment, and one was discuss further. The two options in support of RMS were not majority held opinions, and were held by ~1/6-1/3 of voters. No comment beat "call for the removal of RMS" by only 8 votes. For me, the takeaway here is that while Debian will issue no comment, 2/3+ of voters in Debian supported calling for RMSs removal. It's clear which way the tide is moving, even if Debian says nothing. Source data: https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_rms/results.txt https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_rms/results.txt Edit: My 2/3+ estimate is a napkin math overestimate, and the number is probably closer to the 50-60% other comments have suggested below.
- CameronNemo 6y ago> 2/3+ of voters in Debian supported calling for RMSs removal How did you come to that number?
- Pfhreak 6y agoLook at the row for option 2 in the data table, it will show you how many people preferred that option over other options. Roughly two thirds preferred removing RMS over "we should talk about this further", for example.
- zajio1am 6y agoRow for option 2 is: Option 2 137 168 165 239 227 199 222 222 voted for option 2 over "we should talk about this further" (default position), which is ~53% (222/420).
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- umvi 6y agoCan someone fill me in on the RMS drama/politics? Is this because he was cancelled due to (supposedly) defending Epstein and he's now trying to uncancel himself?
- whatever_dude 6y agoAccording to some, he's been an out-of-touch, controversial, abusive voice for FSF for a while. The MIT/Epstein stuff is what gets talked about, and might have been what brought this to a more general public attention, but it's not specifically what the calls for resignation are about.
- zamalek 6y agoHe continues to do intolerant stuff: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix
- visarga 6y agois this the "we don't tolerate intolerance" logic?
- tryonenow 6y agoThe only intolerance here is on behalf of a viciously ableist movement which does not allow for purely rational opinions from someone clearly on the autistic spectrum. Making women "uncomfortable" without making or implying advances is purely intolerant of those who fall slightly outside of social norms; I haven't seen any evidence that he actually did or said anything predatory or sexual. It's the same implicit social shaming that socially awkward "nerds" and "geeks" receive in highschool, except turned up to 11 because of a vicious social movement which explicitly targets outliers. The open source community was far more tolerant when it was merit based and race/gender blind, before it was infested with ideologues and the social contagion that is the social [in]justice movement. Frankly, normies are ruining programming communities by demanding that the culture change to be inclusive of their norms, to the detriment of the very people who founded the movement. It's painfully ironic, and the people leading this charge are simply grabbing at power justified by self righteousness.
- kstenerud 6y agoI don't get why organizations feel they need to weigh in on this so much. The FSF has a code of conduct (https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct.en.html https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct.en.html), so it's pretty clear what the conditions are for removing someone. Either remove him according to the rules of the code of conduct, or leave him be. That's what COCs are for. If you're not happy with the COC, push for changes.
- Moiman 6y agoFSF and FSFE are different organizations.
- remram 6y agoAnd on this particular issue, FSFE disapproved publicly: https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.en.html https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.en.html
- yurielt 6y agoNo you see that is what the heteropatriarchal meanies at the Free Software Foundation wants you to believe in reality if you don’t completely change your institution every time a pink haired person complains in Twitter it means you are a nazi and or rapist . . Edit: it’s sarcasm just on case
- fsf4lyfe 6y agoGood. RMS did nothing wrong really, and is the victim of a pile-on by people who can't tolerate others' opinions. I'm glad to see that Debian isn't caving to the ignorant masses here. The FSF under RMS's leadership has done more for computing freedom than any other organization. So what if RMS is outspoken about his beliefs? That's exactly the forthright attitude that enabled him to succeed in promoting the GPL so widely. We should all be very glad of this, and not condemn the man just because a few whiners can't deal with someone disagreeing with them.
- krastanov 6y agoIt is not enough to be "right" to promote a good idea. You need to be a charismatic leader to succeed at FSF's mission. Independently of whether RMS is an intolerant creep or a misunderstood visionary, I do not think it should be difficult to see that he would not be an efficient evangelist for FSF today.
- account42 6y agoOn the contrary, what the FSF needs is precisely a leader that does not compromise his views in order to win the popularity game.
- solosoyokaze 6y agoThe FSF is already beyond useless. They don't "need" anything as they don't accomplish anything. It's just a cult of personality around RMS at this point. It's beyond redemption.
- krastanov 6y agoI think you are missing the point I was making: If you can not inspire others to action, it does not matter whether you are right, because you will not make the world a better place by simply being right.
- solosoyokaze 6y agoWhy should anyone be subjected to RMS’ opinion on the age of consent? Or the Epstein case? RMS created this situation by injecting his unwanted opinions into to public sphere and now he’s rightfully paying the price for that.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- heikkilevanto 6y agoI think "no comment" is the most reasonable and mature result. Debian is not directly involved in that fight, and adding fuel to the fight, on either side, is not going to help much.
- Shish2k 6y agoI wish more people felt this way. The pressure for all people (and all organisations) to pick a side in all issues doesn’t seem like it’s actually helping to fix very many issues...
- throwaway0xa 5y ago"No comment" is equal to "silence is violence". You're directly involved in and complicit in the crime if you don't make public statements.