Here is something close to the fundamental issue: Believing in private life, that people are entitled to their own associations and opinions (even bad ones!), and entitled to make their own mistakes, too — and that, barring some direct connection to work life or extraordinary circumstance, that none of this is the concern of the little platoons of finks lurking in the community, particularly when driven by facebook lackeys muzzling everyday journalists who go against the grain. We see this not only here but also to medical information dealing with coronavirus and vaccines.
--------------------- Christopher Dimech General Administrator - Naiad Informatics - GNU Project (Geocomputation) - Geophysical Simulation - Geological Subsurface Mapping - Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation - Natural Resource Exploration and Production - Free Software Advocacy > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 at 9:41 AM > From: "Soul Studios" <m...@soulstudios.co.nz> > To: "Richard Kenner" <ken...@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> > Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, m...@klomp.org, nat...@acm.org > Subject: Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee > > > On 30/03/2021 1:18 am, Richard Kenner wrote: > >> I think I will leave this discussion up to those who have more > >> familiarity with the guy than I do. There's no doubt that some of the > >> stuff Stallman has written creeps me the hell out, and I think it was > >> more the tone of the OP I objected to. > > > > I mostly want to stay out of this and will leave much of this discussion to > > others (though I have met RMS personally on a number of occaisions), but I > > want to mostly say that I agree with Jeff that it's important that this > > discussion stay civil. > > > > I believe that to a large extent, the discussion here is reflective of a > > much larger discussion in society of to what extent, if at all, an entity > > associated with an person must or should take action based on things that > > that person does while not associated with that entity. > > It's worth noting that when RMS was kicked from FSF, there was a > 2k-strong petition in favour, and a 3.5k-strong petition against. So > clearly there is a discussion to be had, but as long as the left-wing > (through self-rightiousness and threats of exclusion/withdrawal) and the > right-wing (through belligerance and abuse/hostility) are trying > actively to shut down discussion, that will not take place. >
