Richard Stallman recently announced at LibrePlanet that he would return to the FSF board. Soon after this announcement, many articles appeared online stating strong objection to his return.
I have read several of them and I do not like what I see. Repeatedly I encounter the false claim that RMS "defended" Jeffrey Epstein. I also see voices which criticize RMS employing vague terms such as "bad behavior" which those not properly informed would interpret as being fond of Epstein and antagonistic toward women who fall victim to sexual exploitation. In response to the storm of criticism, the FSF Board has decided to vote to determine whether RMS should return to the board. I observe that both sides have initiated petition drives: https://github.com/KenjiBrown/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md https://itwire.com/open-source/foss-developers-launch-petition-to-push-out-stallman,-fsf-board.html In my opinion the FSF leaders are not doing things in the right order. First they should make an official statement saying that there are serious errors in recent news articles. They should also consider legal action. The decision whether RMS belongs on the FSF Board should wait until those who are spreading misinformation are brought to justice. I say this because I know from experience that I can't fix bugs in software I work on in the absence of accurate information. Any programmer that responds to unfounded claims about misbehaving programs will end up wasting time, or worse, breaking a program that works fine. One well-known problem with non-free software is that advertised features often do not live up to promises. Vendors can get away with this because the source code is kept hidden. When source code is available there is much less opportunity to make exaggerated claims. Truth is important if you want to write good software. Dishonesty invites poor quality. I cannot stress this too much. If you want good people to lead your organization you must make sure you have the right information before you cast your vote.