Dear @fsf, do you think that “It was right for me to […]” looks like an apology? Do you believe an organization cannot outlive its founder? Do you think promises to make the board membership process “transparent” will be enough to restore trust? … I’m baffled.
@civodul @fsf His address seems to be more of a general response than just an apology to anyone he’s hurt (which is included in the third paragraph). Various people have raised a lot of valid concerns, but also a lot of misinterpretations and false accusations. I think it’s only fair for him to accept the former but reject the latter.
@civodul @fsf I don't think that thread was the worst of his behavior, but his explicit refusal to acknowledge the criticism there really doesn't make for a decent apology. He did vaguely apologize for something else earlier, but did not address his problematic positions on consent, pronouns, or anything else.
@fsf Unpaid volunteer? FSF, please think about paying to all the unpaid positions at the foundation. It supposed to be free as in speech, right?!
@fsf I am sorry that you no longer want me or anybody else to feel welcome or comfortable interacting with the FSF. I am sorry for the people who want to continue interacting with the FSF despite this. You should be ashamed to have accepted him back into these positions of power. He is not capable of conducting himself with decorum or respect, and placing him in a leadership position is simply not appropriate.
@selamatC @fsf It's not because the FSF has a different social perspective. It's because they continue to defend base disrespect. They know Stallman makes people uncomfortable and they just elected him President. They're throwing away donors, potential donors, contributors, and potential contributors, just to avoid the possibility of accidentally making the community diverse. I'm not a wuss for taking a stand, you're a wuss for being afraid of the abstract concept of principles.
@DanHakimi @fsf you sound incredibly reactionary and you have your facts mixed up. 1. Stallman has been appointed to the board, he is not retaking the role of president. 2. The FSF published a statement several days ago reaffirming their respect for all social groups. You're taking his appointment to the board as virtue signalling when the FSF is publicly stating the opposite of what you're being reactionary to.
@DanHakimi @fsf like IBM acted respectfully to the victims of the Holocaust? Your employer?
Do you feel the need to resign now? Surely your principles are the same regardless of the situation.
@DanHakimi @fsf when the SFLC, SFC, and Debian foundations, which are international and have people of various political opinions and cultural norms, appoint someone based on merit to a position of power, and it leaks that they said something you are sensitive to but is not related to the work they do, will you stop support of those groups too? It sounds to me like you're looking for some drama.
@selamatC @fsf there were no "leaks" about anything Stallman said. He made frequent public statements over the course of decdaes, and as people told him they were reprehensible, he did what he does best: he stubbornly and loudly plodded on. This is not a one-off incident, it was not a series of mistakes, it's who he is down to his core.
@selamatC @fsf Not sure why you decided to change the topic *completely* (I can tell what connection you were pretending to make, I just can't tell why you thought that was actaully a connection)... But IBM in 2021 has a number of legal strategies and failsafes in place to cut ties with any local subsidiaries and suffocate them should the need arise.
@DanHakimi @fsf seriously, the gall of a guy making 6 figures from a multinational that exploits workers and governments by selling snakeoil, that's
also been in trouble multiple times for corruption, and helped the Nazis exterminate Jews and refuses to own up to it, becomes judgemental about a socially inept guy who is fighting for software freedom and a better society for a non-profit.. give your head a shake. You don't sit any higher than RMS.
@selamatC @fsf You don't know what I make, what I make has nothing to do with this conversation. I can't speak much to IBM's history, I had heard about it internally and in a few other places but never read this book, so... I'm not sure what to tell you about its history, except that no, it's still not related to Stallman.
@DanHakimi @fsf I'll be more direct:
You are judging someone in the public sphere differently because they are in the public sphere. You are not judging your own employers worse actions because they are not in the public sphere. My argument is that you are a hypocrite for not judging your own organization in the same lens you judge Stallman because one pays you, and another is a celebrity.
@DanHakimi @fsf except they didn't. Because no one was hurt by this except you and others being reactionary. The FSF did not do anything negative towards women or any other tech minority group by appointing Stallman to the board. In fact, his expertise will probably do more for free software than excluding him. In a couple of years, no one will care, except hypocrite like you. More people will care about your employers terrible, morally reprehensible history though, I can assure you of that.
Should we call you a Saint?... In every aspect of your life?
"I am sorry for the people who want to continue interacting with the FSF despite this."
Then be sorry for me 😅 since I've finally turned into an associate member. Feeling proud to support the #FSF (at last!). Don't expect me to feel sorry for this move, and even less to apology.
@fsf Deeply disappointed in this decision to bring RMS back. It reeks of desperation and lack of insight into how the community feels about the issues of our time.
RMS is not a lawyer, nor trained legally. Looking to him for advice on legal matters seems farcical. While he does have connections and insight into the technical components of free software, it hardly matters as much as the lost reputation from his gaffes.
I, for one, will no longer be a member of an organization that is deaf to us
@Keltounet @fsf RMS is a dick and they handled the situation poorly but your reactionary hyperbole of calling them "dead" only serves to polarize opinion. We all individually are responsible for our online demeanour even if people like RMS do not keep good manners. He's still one of the best thinkers of our time on Open Source. I was responding to your comment glibly, I'm well aware of the anger of wanting to see someone you dislike fail, succeed. I only provide this context as an outsider.
@Keltounet "I was witness to one as well in 1998"
What was it about exactly?
(vous êtes même autorisé à me répondre en français ^^)
@fsf I think it's not Richard Stallman, but the low-grade "journalists" and woke "activists" (And probably the big tech oligarchs behind the scenes) who cancelled him in the first place with defamatory lies and unfounded accusations by means of harassment and intimidation that owe us an apology. The woke should pay a price.
@fsf Welcome back RMS. Still can't believe that a (poorly thought out indeed) message on a mailing list had such a negative impact.
@fsf I hope he can regain people's trust once again. I'm really happy for him, and I wish everything goes well for the FSF and Free Software in general, cheers! 😊
This service is offered by alarig.
Beer, privacy and free software lovers. Join us!