Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> writes:
> On 26/03/2021 15:54, Aaron Wolf wrote: >> I really appreciate seeing the perspective from Georgia. Thanks also >> deeply to Deb Nicholson for engaging here in this space. Obviously, >> these negative reports about RMS being presented *here* amounts to the >> opposite of an echo-chamber. These voices are bring extremely valuable >> perspective — the sort we *lose* if we aren't careful to assure that our >> spaces are not only open to anyone but actually in *practice* have them >> feel welcome and stay. >> >> The Free Software movement is weaker for every loss of perspective. We >> have a duty to be not only gracious but appreciative of people like Deb >> for engaging and staying with us despite the tensions. >> >> Georgia's line is exceptionally important: "…the fact that he faced >> consequences for his creepy Epdtein-adjacent comments and not the >> decades of shitty behavior…" >> >> These are not people who are dogpiling on hearsay or gotcha online >> statements or whatever else. Those anti-patterns do indeed happen, and >> they polluted and harmed the credibility of the recent open letter >> against RMS. But here we have people who fully understand the unfairness >> and yet can express from extensive personal experience the *actual* >> reasons why RMS's leadership is problematic. >> >> As someone who deeply and profoundly respects RMS for various reasons, I >> still don't just simply support his leadership role. I do not want him >> banished, I want him to learn and do better on his pain points. I don't >> want to be naive though, efforts in this direction have obviously been >> done for years and not been enough. >> >> I would like to continue to get RMS' insightful and pointed perspectives >> without having him lead the organization. I would like him to live in >> the zone where his genius most thrives and he contributes the most, and >> I suggest that the other roles he has had would be better filled by others. >> >> If we want a resilient movement, we need to be really open to engaging >> with complaints. An organization that defends the status quo against >> such critics is like the NSA attacking Ed Snowden and people insinuating >> that Snowden is working for Russia (similar to people talking about how >> Deb now works for the OSI and the OSI is connected to corporations). >> >> I'm not suggesting deference to the outside unfair critics, the people >> who do indeed levy unfair attacks, mine quotes, spread FUD, etc. That >> stuff can be real, and we need to defend against it. >> >> But people like Deb are our whistleblowers, they are insiders who are >> bringing attention to serious issues. If we ignore or attack >> whistleblowers, we will fail to learn important lessons. This attitude >> can be fatal to a movement. >> >> In solidarity, >> Aaron Wolf >> (FSF member since 2014, co-founder of Snowdrift.coop) >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> libreplanet-discuss mailing list >> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org >> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss >> > > > I agree, here, there are clearly things that have happened that are > of concern, but that seems to happen elsewhere in the free software, > the tech community and out side too. > > What we need to do, is have very robust standards of how people > behave, drawn up by and for the community, standards based on good > practice from other communities, and look beyond free software. Ideas > / policies need to be evidence, data based so that they are credible. > > Once done, and it will never get fully completed, as it is needs to be > constantly refined, it is not a write once then forget thing. > > * Examine Annually, to make sure the policy / policies are still > working, relevant, inclusive and represent everyone concerned. > > * Clear policy on training, of staff and new staff / volunteers so > people are educated in equality and diversity. If that means an > agreed policy on pronouns it is then consistent fsf wide. > > * A clear policy on what happens, if a complaint is made, how it is > handled, time scale and what, if any the consequences are, how are > allegations handled for example? > > * Fully transparent, > > * Something that can be learnt from > > * Everyone agrees and no one is above this > > * A policy where you are innocent of a crime till proven guilty, this > protects both victims and the accused. Investigations should aim to > reach the facts of what happened, > > * If these things are handled properly, there is no need to > whistleblow or just leave which to me that is a last resort. > > * Make it clear what the talk is about, and the talk is relevant to > free software, drm, etc, Right to repair or which ever it is, > > We have a safe space policy for libre that states certain things are > not tolerated. This last statement sounds dictatorial. I do generally agree make a good environment as you have proposed, but clarifying that it should not hurt freedom of speech. _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss