On Sun, 11 Apr 2021, 19:28 Alexandre Oliva, <ol...@gnu.org> wrote: > Jonathan, > > It's very offensive for you to misattribute a disagreeing position as > veneration. >
There have been many posts over the past two weeks suggesting that without RMS to guide us, GCC will become a pawn of the NSA, or that nobody has any authority to decide on the future of GNU projects except RMS (a view also stated on GNU mailing lists by moderators of those very lists), or other silly claims that are based on little but veneration. They're not really based on anything about GCC, just "y u no like RMS?" > I could name many reasons for me to disagree with yours, including > justice, truth, honesty, tolerance, freedom of speech and unity of the > movement. > > If anything, it's threatening to abandon a project over false > allegations about a person, on occasion of that person rejoining the > board of an organization that was founded and has always supported the > project who's still led by that person, that makes the issue personal > and based on blind faith, though in the opposite sense of veneration. > Oh I have other reasons to consider the FSF a dead end too. > If you find any offense in the previous paragraph, you understand > exactly why I feel offended by your retort, so please try to take that > into account in your attempts to participate in a kind debate. > Kind debate. Right. Maybe somebody from the GNU project or the FSF could tell one of their GNU Maintainers (apparently part of the governance structure of the GNU project) to stop calling people mad, or rats, or to stop endless off-topic trolling about communism. There is no kind debate when every other post is an attack from a troll. Your own emails are always carefully considered (and carefully skate around the actual issues people raised) but most of the other voices objecting to the requests to make changes to GCC are coming from outsiders who are only too happy to insult GCC devs and derail any "debate".
