David, On Apr 18, 2021, David Malcolm via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> I reject the idea that those of us who work on GCC have to put up with > arbitrary emails from random crazies on the internet without even the > simple recourse of being able to put individuals on moderation. All sides in this multi-threaded debate, since the very first message, have put forth crazy, unfounded, unsupported, and false theories. That you're willing to tolerate some, because you find them believable, but are not willing to tolerate others, because you disagree with them, is not conducive of the tolerant and welcoming atmosphere I'd like us to pursue. That you claim some are entitled to share their opinions, because they've contributed code (and you agree with them), and that others are not because they haven't (and you disagree with them), but you do not disqualify those who have not contributed code (but you agree with them) and dismiss those who have (that you disagree with), you not only confirm that the issue really is about agreement/disagreement, but attempt to frame the intolerance to dissenting ideas as a chaste system. Again, not conducive of the tolerant and welcoming atmosphere I'd like us to pursue. I recall a scene from the original Cosmos TV series, by Carl Sagan, in which he's set within an out-of-scale model of the solar system, walking about the planets and talking about some batshit crazy theory by some scientist about how a planet-sized body had some day been ejected from Jupiter and floated about the solar system causing, among other effects, the Earth to stop spinning and then start spinning again, as described in some religious book. Then he proceeds to describe the most serious scientific problem involving that theory: that some self-proclaimed scientists attempted to prevent those ideas from being published. Preventing ideas you don't already agree with from being shared is not the way to do science, quite the opposite. Being intolerant to ideas that aren't prevalent in your filter bubble, and demanding others to take action to protect you from as much as being exposed to them, does not seem conducive of scientific progress, of collaboration, of tolerance, of inclusivity, or of diversity. I certainly don't find that welcoming, but rather toxic. I find it requiring alignment and obedience rather than diversity and freedom. Please reflect some more thoroughly about this apparent misalignment between your actions and your words. Thanks for reading, -- Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/ Free Software Activist GNU Toolchain Engineer Vim, Vi, Voltei pro Emacs -- GNUlius Caesar
