Re: Printing from Linux (was: Re: Nuance Regarding RMS)
I certainly did not mean to disparage the efforts of the people working on the Debian printing software, who have really raised the bar. It's great that printers usually "just work", that they're automatically sniffed off the net, etc. Every time I print a page I remember the bad old days and am thankful for cups-browsed and all that. It seems fair to say that even in the Free Software community most people have resigned themselves to purchasing devices with proprietary firmware, that can be modified or even examined only with the cooperation of the manufacturers. They're all over: printers, dishwashers, cars, televisions, treadmills, smart microphones, mobile phones, smart bluetooth lightbulbs, implanted cardiac pacemakers, deep brain stimulation devices. As a community we try to work around it: get them to use standard protocols and interfaces. To be citizens of that world. But not RMS. He's not happy with that status quo. He's not okay with people having radio-controlled devices buried deep in their flesh, able to kill them with an errant pulse, their behavior ultimately controlled by others. I'm a practical man. My house is filled with devices whose software is either proprietary or, at best, Tivo-ized so it serves some other master. But RMS saw the growing dangers of this sort of situation, and I admire his vision in the matter, and his principles in fighting it tooth and nail, never giving a quarter, never yielding for the sake of convenience. This is not meant to minimize the enormous efforts many others, including you in particular, have put into getting things like software that interacts with broken proprietary printers (my sometimes-actually-prints but-always-happily-scans Dell B1165nfw, for instance) to work. Rather it's to say that we may be soldiers in this army: but RMS is the grizzled old sergeant, scarred and battleworn, unwilling to negotiate with the enemy, unwilling to strike a temporary bargain or sign a truce that compromises even a hair of a principle, spitting invective at the practical politicians and comfortable generals breaking bread with those who seek to control and subvert us, pure to the last drop. Sure, he smells bad, and has foul manners. He's terrible PR, a relic and an embarrassment. And printers still aren't free, and maybe we've made our peace with that. But he's going to keep fighting until they are anyway. --Barak.
Printing from Linux (was: Re: Nuance Regarding RMS)
I'm well aware the discussion period is over, but I can't let that one pass, so bear with me. Le vendredi, 2 avril 2021, 18.19:02 h CEST Barak A. Pearlmutter a écrit : > Fifty years ago a laserprinter didn't work right because of some > software issue and he couldn't fix it because the software in that > car-sized prototype Xerox laserprinter was proprietary and it pissed > him off and he vowed that one day *nobody* will be in that position. > He's holding fast to that vow. He still works tirelessly, every day, > to bring us that vision. > > I've got a stupid Dell laserprinter 80cm from me and it doesn't work > right because of some stupid software issue and I can't fix it because > I don't have the source code. Nobody cares. Well, except RMS. He > cares. As Debian Printing Team member, when you state that "Nobody cares" (about printing from Linux systems), I don't receive it particularily well [0]. Not for our work specifically (we're "just" maintainers), but for the tireless work from upstreams who brought the ecosystem up to a point at which I'm not afraid to claim that Debian Bullseye will ship with the best (Linux) printing user experience _ever_. Of course, this is not due to the release of FLOSS printer firmware [1], but rather to standardization of network (and wire) protocols, lots of software architecturing and writing, as well as intense lobbying to reach a point where virtually all newly sold printers support open standards, that are now supported "driverless", directly from standard Debian installs [2]. (Debian's not unique in that regard, it's all free software). Although the initial trigger for the launch of the Free Sofware Foundation (and movement) might indeed have been a frustration with printers [3], from where I stand, I can reasonably state that OpenPrinting [4] _does_ care. Specifically, Till Kamppeter and Michael Sweet (among countless others) _do_ care. And their work has brought _immense_ progress for the specific question of "freedom to use printers in ways we see fit". I'm certainly not an expert on the history of these organizations, but it seems (to me) that we're at this point thanks to tireless efforts and industrial pragmatism from OpenPrinting (hence the Linux Foundation), the IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group, Apple [5] and certainly others; but not particularily thanks to the FSF (or RMS) (notwithstanding the FSF's contribution to the principles of Free Software, of course). RMS and the FSF certainly care for Free Software, but I'd refrain from using the "printers are bad proprietary machines, and printing from Linux sucks" example to illustrate that point: this particular problem was (mostly) solved by others; by turning this problem into "(recent) printers are bad proprietary machines that (mostly) follow open standards, hence printing from all OS' using (free) software implementing these standards is (mostly) flawless". -- OdyX [0] But I also took no offense, as I also read it as a hyperbole of sorts. [1] But in an era where most electronics from dishwashers to wireless routers to computer phones are essentially closed boxes of non-FLOSS software+firmware+hardware combinations, insisting for the release of FLOSS printer _firmware_ is not an effective way to reach our goals. [2] https://wiki.debian.org/DriverlessPrinting [3] https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/201cthe-printer-story201d-redux-a-testimonial-about-the-injustice-of-proprietary-firmware [4] Currently a free software organization under The Linux Foundation. [5] Yes, Apple acquired and then maintained CUPS under a FLOSS license for quite some time! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
b...@debian.org wrote: >I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. He Thank you for this contribute. -- ciao, Marco
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
On April 1, 2021 4:21:59 PM GMT+05:30, "Barak A. Pearlmutter" wrote: >He makes unwelcome sexual >overtures to women, but backs off when turned down (with perhaps >isolated exceptions decades ago). That's totally inappropriate >behaviour. He seems unable to sense when someone finds him repellent. Not always women at receiving end are able to express their "repellency", especially when the person on other end is at a much higher position (which is the case here). -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
Le vendredi 02 avril 2021 à 17:47:08+0300, Adrian Bunk a écrit : > Hi Barak, > > thanks a lot for this nuanced view. > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:51:59AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: > >... > > He’s remarkably stubborn in technical matters even when outside his > > domain of expertise and completely wrong. > >... > > The traits that make RMS appear awkward are the same that made him > create the GNU project and the FSF, and without RMS being the way > he is Debian would not exist. Should it be true, I still don't see how this should excuse him for his behaviour. Past great actions are not any immunity totem for bad shit we do. The same as when one tries to improve they tend to ask people forgetting about their former bad shit. Cheers, -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
Adrian Bunk wrote: > The traits that make RMS appear awkward are the same that made him > create the GNU project and the FSF, and without RMS being the way he > is Debian would not exist. Yes! RMS is one stubborn guy. Fifty years ago a laserprinter didn't work right because of some software issue and he couldn't fix it because the software in that car-sized prototype Xerox laserprinter was proprietary and it pissed him off and he vowed that one day *nobody* will be in that position. He's holding fast to that vow. He still works tirelessly, every day, to bring us that vision. I've got a stupid Dell laserprinter 80cm from me and it doesn't work right because of some stupid software issue and I can't fix it because I don't have the source code. Nobody cares. Well, except RMS. He cares. He has my back on this one. Whatever else you want to say about him: RMS has got all our backs on this one. We can call him names in public, we can make fun of him, we can bully him, we can exclude him, we can ostracise him. Even so, no matter what, he'll still have our backs on this one. --Barak.
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
Hi Barak, thanks a lot for this nuanced view. On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:51:59AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: >... > He’s remarkably stubborn in technical matters even when outside his > domain of expertise and completely wrong. >... The traits that make RMS appear awkward are the same that made him create the GNU project and the FSF, and without RMS being the way he is Debian would not exist. cu Adrian We acknowledge the role of the GNU project in our system and like to think of Debian as "Son of GNU". Bruce Perens, Debian Project Leader
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:20:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: >... > The open letter does not state that RMS should be ejected from the free > software movement in general, or from the FSF specifically. Were that > the case, I would agree with you that it was wrong. Instead, it merely > states that he should be removed from leadership positions, both in the > FSF and in the GNU project. >... The open letter you support starts with: Richard M. Stallman, frequently known as RMS, has been a dangerous force in the free software community for a long time. He has shown himself to be misogynist, ableist, and transphobic, among other serious accusations of impropriety. These sorts of beliefs have no place in the free software, digital rights, and tech communities. You want Debian to make a public statement that Debian considers Richard M. Stallman "misogynist, ableist, and transphobic". You want Debian to make a public statement that Richard M. Stallman is a "dangerous force in the free software community" for whom there is "no place in the free software community". cu Adrian
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
On 4/1/21 11:20 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > The open letter does not state that RMS should be ejected from the free > software movement in general, or from the FSF specifically. Were that > the case, I would agree with you that it was wrong. Instead, it merely > states that he should be removed from leadership positions, both in the > FSF and in the GNU project. Really? The open letter contains: "It is time for RMS to step back from the free software, tech ethics, digital rights, and tech communities" Isn't this an equivalent of stating that "RMS should be ejected from the free software movement in general"? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 11:51 +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: > I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. > He > takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in > technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise and > completely wrong. He is not a fun house guest. His manners as a > dinner > guest are atrocious. He was by far the most logistically problematic > seminar speaker I have ever hosted. He takes umbrage at quite > innocuous colloquial phrasing, and is obstinate about his own > idiosyncratic interpretation of English semantics. He overshares, and > has great difficulty reading others' emotions. > > But he's not transphobic. That accusation is basically scurrilous. At > https://libreboot.org/news/rms.html is an impassioned but well > reasoned (at least in this regard) defense of RMS from a trans woman > he had a big public fight with. “If you actually tell Richard your > preferred pronouns, he’ll use them with you without hesitation. > Several of my friends are trans and also speak to Richard, mostly via > email. He respects their pronouns also.” > > Calling him ablist is similarly unfair. He was defending women’s > right > to terminate pregnancies when the fetus has a condition like trisomy > 21. Whatever your views are on the underlying political question, to > twist that as ablist is quite a stretch. > > RMS is not violent. > > He's weird with everyone, which do I think has, in general, a > disproportionate effect on women. As does his poor personal hygiene. > He had a mattress in his office at MIT because he was basically > living > there. That might give lots of people squicky feelings, but would > have > a disproportionate effect on women. He makes unwelcome sexual > overtures to women, but backs off when turned down (with perhaps > isolated exceptions decades ago). That's totally inappropriate > behaviour. He seems unable to sense when someone finds him repellent. > > Basically, he’s super creepy and unpleasant. He picks his feet and > eats it while delivering seminars. > > Nina Paley hosted him in her apartment in New York on a number of > occasions, and had a similar read. > > I'm not sure he'd be an ideal board member, but that’s a practical > rather than ethical consideration, and surely best left to the > judgement of the individual organization. > > What’s problematic to me about this whole “Cancel RMS” business is > the > lack of nuance. He’s clearly not neurotypical in a way that makes him > very difficult to deal with. He doesn’t make appropriate eye contact. > He’s strange in ways that I think, on average, affects women more > than > men. But should we bully or ostracise him for that? I think we should > try to develop coping strategies for both him and people who want or > need to deal with him. That’s actually supporting and accommodating > diversity. And it’s hard! We should seek ways to leverage his > strengths, which are considerable. Of course, that assumes lack of > malice, which I think is the case with RMS. He’s not malicious. He > really wants to connect, but he’s utterly unable to. He’s weird and > clueless. And he’s obsessed with software freedom. > > --Barak Pearlmutter > System Override: How Bitcoin, Blockchain, Free Speech & Free Tech Can Change Everything Published December 28th 2020 ISBN-13 : 979-8587699816 adding his recent publication to support your points.
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
Hi Barak, On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:51:59AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: [...] > I'm not sure he'd be an ideal board member, but that’s a practical > rather than ethical consideration, and surely best left to the > judgement of the individual organization. > > What’s problematic to me about this whole “Cancel RMS” business is the > lack of nuance. He’s clearly not neurotypical in a way that makes him > very difficult to deal with. So, In my book, that's not an excuse. I too am not neurotypical, and my natural tendencies make me, too, very difficult to deal with. However, most people who are not neurotypical are still capable of learning. When people tell me that I'm being difficult, I listen. When people tell me that what I'm doing may push people away, I will usually attempt to avoid that particular type of behavior. I do not always succeed; but in doing so, over the years, I've changed my personality from someone who used to be rather annoying to what, I hope, is not the case anymore. RMS has been told, on numerous occasions, that the things he's doing are counterproductive. He either chose to ignore the advice, or decided that the advice was wrong. Either way, the result is that we now have a person in a position of leadership who tends to push people away, rather than being a positive force in the free software movement. > He doesn’t make appropriate eye contact. > He’s strange in ways that I think, on average, affects women more than > men. But should we bully or ostracise him for that? I don't think that pointing out that the way in which the FSF made a decision that they could have known was going to antagonize a lot of people amounts to "bullying". I don't think RMS should be forced out of the free software world altogether. He has many accomplishments, and we should be grateful to him for jumpstarting the free software movement as a whole (I know I am). However, there is a difference between acknowledging a person's past accomplishments, and believing that he is the right person for a position of leadership. In the case of RMS, I do the former; I don't do the latter. I do think that RMS can still have a position within the FSF; but for him to announce that he's back on the board, that it's a done deal, and that "he won't be resigning again", just like that, was a mistake. It's that mistake that this is a reaction to. > I think we should > try to develop coping strategies for both him and people who want or > need to deal with him. I don't think we need to continue dancing around any one person, both because it's annoying for everyone who needs to dance, *and* because *it doesn't help the person in question*. I think RMS needs to go see a therapist. Not because I think he's crazy or anything of the sorts, but because I can tell you from personal experience that a therapist can teach you certain techniques that may help you improve your own personality in an incremental fashion. > That’s actually supporting and accommodating diversity. And it’s hard! > We should seek ways to leverage his strengths, which are considerable. > Of course, that assumes lack of malice, which I think is the case with > RMS. He’s not malicious. I agree that he is not malicious, but I also don't think that is at all relevant. Malice is not required for being incapable of leading. I think RMS is utterly incapable of being a good person in a position of leadership for a community that I consider myself to be a member of -- and that's still true even if I'm not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the FSF in any shape or form. The open letter does not state that RMS should be ejected from the free software movement in general, or from the FSF specifically. Were that the case, I would agree with you that it was wrong. Instead, it merely states that he should be removed from leadership positions, both in the FSF and in the GNU project. I agree with that, because I don't think he is the right person to lead either of those. -- To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy -- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
On 2021-04-01 at 15:06, Milan Zamazal wrote: >> "JS" == Jonas Smedegaard writes: > > JS> Question is, this being a process to compose a ballot for a > JS> vote: How to transform those observations into a text for the > JS> ballot? Or if that is absurd, how else to proceed (other than > JS> shrug and let the boting process continue disregarding those > JS> observations? > > I think “The Debian Project will not issue a public statement” and “None > of the above” are good enough ballot options for the purpose. And > definitely much better than voting about one’s weirdness or malice, > directly or indirectly. For whatever it may be worth, I parsed the original essay-mail in this thread as being not a starting point for a ballot option, but an attempt by one potential voter to convey his perspective on the issue to other potential voters, and thus to potentially affect how those others may choose to vote when the time to do so comes. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
> "JS" == Jonas Smedegaard writes: JS> Question is, this being a process to compose a ballot for a JS> vote: How to transform those observations into a text for the JS> ballot? Or if that is absurd, how else to proceed (other than JS> shrug and let the boting process continue disregarding those JS> observations? I think “The Debian Project will not issue a public statement” and “None of the above” are good enough ballot options for the purpose. And definitely much better than voting about one’s weirdness or malice, directly or indirectly. Regards, Milan
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 11:51:59+0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter a écrit : > I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. He > takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in > technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise and > completely wrong. He is not a fun house guest. His manners as a dinner > guest are atrocious. He was by far the most logistically problematic > seminar speaker I have ever hosted. He takes umbrage at quite > innocuous colloquial phrasing, and is obstinate about his own > idiosyncratic interpretation of English semantics. He overshares, and > has great difficulty reading others' emotions. > > But he's not transphobic. That accusation is basically scurrilous. At > https://libreboot.org/news/rms.html is an impassioned but well > reasoned (at least in this regard) defense of RMS from a trans woman > he had a big public fight with. “If you actually tell Richard your > preferred pronouns, he’ll use them with you without hesitation. > Several of my friends are trans and also speak to Richard, mostly via > email. He respects their pronouns also.” > > Calling him ablist is similarly unfair. He was defending women’s right > to terminate pregnancies when the fetus has a condition like trisomy > 21. Whatever your views are on the underlying political question, to > twist that as ablist is quite a stretch. > > RMS is not violent. > > He's weird with everyone, which do I think has, in general, a > disproportionate effect on women. As does his poor personal hygiene. > He had a mattress in his office at MIT because he was basically living > there. That might give lots of people squicky feelings, but would have > a disproportionate effect on women. He makes unwelcome sexual > overtures to women, but backs off when turned down (with perhaps > isolated exceptions decades ago). That's totally inappropriate > behaviour. He seems unable to sense when someone finds him repellent. > > Basically, he’s super creepy and unpleasant. He picks his feet and > eats it while delivering seminars. > > Nina Paley hosted him in her apartment in New York on a number of > occasions, and had a similar read. > > I'm not sure he'd be an ideal board member, but that’s a practical > rather than ethical consideration, and surely best left to the > judgement of the individual organization. > > What’s problematic to me about this whole “Cancel RMS” business is the > lack of nuance. He’s clearly not neurotypical in a way that makes him > very difficult to deal with. He doesn’t make appropriate eye contact. > He’s strange in ways that I think, on average, affects women more than > men. But should we bully or ostracise him for that? I think we should > try to develop coping strategies for both him and people who want or > need to deal with him. That’s actually supporting and accommodating > diversity. And it’s hard! We should seek ways to leverage his > strengths, which are considerable. Of course, that assumes lack of > malice, which I think is the case with RMS. He’s not malicious. He > really wants to connect, but he’s utterly unable to. He’s weird and > clueless. And he’s obsessed with software freedom. Thanks for this enlightening text Barak and for sharing your feelings on this. -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
Greetings, Debianites, On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:51:59AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. He takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise and completely wrong. He is not a fun house guest. His manners as a dinner guest are atrocious. He was by far the most logistically problematic seminar speaker I have ever hosted. He takes umbrage at quite innocuous colloquial phrasing, and is obstinate about his own idiosyncratic interpretation of English semantics. He overshares, and has great difficulty reading others' emotions. But he's not transphobic. That accusation is basically scurrilous. At https://libreboot.org/news/rms.html is an impassioned but well reasoned (at least in this regard) defense of RMS from a trans woman he had a big public fight with. “If you actually tell Richard your preferred pronouns, he’ll use them with you without hesitation. Several of my friends are trans and also speak to Richard, mostly via email. He respects their pronouns also.” Calling him ablist is similarly unfair. He was defending women’s right to terminate pregnancies when the fetus has a condition like trisomy 21. Whatever your views are on the underlying political question, to twist that as ablist is quite a stretch. RMS is not violent. He's weird with everyone, which do I think has, in general, a disproportionate effect on women. As does his poor personal hygiene. He had a mattress in his office at MIT because he was basically living there. That might give lots of people squicky feelings, but would have a disproportionate effect on women. He makes unwelcome sexual overtures to women, but backs off when turned down (with perhaps isolated exceptions decades ago). That's totally inappropriate behaviour. He seems unable to sense when someone finds him repellent. Basically, he’s super creepy and unpleasant. He picks his feet and eats it while delivering seminars. Nina Paley hosted him in her apartment in New York on a number of occasions, and had a similar read. I'm not sure he'd be an ideal board member, but that’s a practical rather than ethical consideration, and surely best left to the judgement of the individual organization. What’s problematic to me about this whole “Cancel RMS” business is the lack of nuance. He’s clearly not neurotypical in a way that makes him very difficult to deal with. He doesn’t make appropriate eye contact. He’s strange in ways that I think, on average, affects women more than men. But should we bully or ostracise him for that? I think we should try to develop coping strategies for both him and people who want or need to deal with him. That’s actually supporting and accommodating diversity. And it’s hard! We should seek ways to leverage his strengths, which are considerable. Of course, that assumes lack of malice, which I think is the case with RMS. He’s not malicious. He really wants to connect, but he’s utterly unable to. He’s weird and clueless. And he’s obsessed with software freedom. --Barak Pearlmutter I like nuance and non-hyperbolic language :-) Cheers, Filippo -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Filippo Rusconi, PhD ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Research scientist at CNRS ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Debian Developer ⠈⠳⣄ http://msxpertsuite.org http://www.debian.org
Re: Nuance Regarding RMS
Quoting Barak A. Pearlmutter (2021-04-01 12:51:59) > I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. He > takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in > technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise and > completely wrong. He is not a fun house guest. His manners as a dinner > guest are atrocious. He was by far the most logistically problematic > seminar speaker I have ever hosted. He takes umbrage at quite > innocuous colloquial phrasing, and is obstinate about his own > idiosyncratic interpretation of English semantics. He overshares, and > has great difficulty reading others' emotions. > > But he's not transphobic. That accusation is basically scurrilous. At > https://libreboot.org/news/rms.html is an impassioned but well > reasoned (at least in this regard) defense of RMS from a trans woman > he had a big public fight with. “If you actually tell Richard your > preferred pronouns, he’ll use them with you without hesitation. > Several of my friends are trans and also speak to Richard, mostly via > email. He respects their pronouns also.” > > Calling him ablist is similarly unfair. He was defending women’s right > to terminate pregnancies when the fetus has a condition like trisomy > 21. Whatever your views are on the underlying political question, to > twist that as ablist is quite a stretch. > > RMS is not violent. > > He's weird with everyone, which do I think has, in general, a > disproportionate effect on women. As does his poor personal hygiene. > He had a mattress in his office at MIT because he was basically living > there. That might give lots of people squicky feelings, but would have > a disproportionate effect on women. He makes unwelcome sexual > overtures to women, but backs off when turned down (with perhaps > isolated exceptions decades ago). That's totally inappropriate > behaviour. He seems unable to sense when someone finds him repellent. > > Basically, he’s super creepy and unpleasant. He picks his feet and > eats it while delivering seminars. > > Nina Paley hosted him in her apartment in New York on a number of > occasions, and had a similar read. > > I'm not sure he'd be an ideal board member, but that’s a practical > rather than ethical consideration, and surely best left to the > judgement of the individual organization. > > What’s problematic to me about this whole “Cancel RMS” business is the > lack of nuance. He’s clearly not neurotypical in a way that makes him > very difficult to deal with. He doesn’t make appropriate eye contact. > He’s strange in ways that I think, on average, affects women more than > men. But should we bully or ostracise him for that? I think we should > try to develop coping strategies for both him and people who want or > need to deal with him. That’s actually supporting and accommodating > diversity. And it’s hard! We should seek ways to leverage his > strengths, which are considerable. Of course, that assumes lack of > malice, which I think is the case with RMS. He’s not malicious. He > really wants to connect, but he’s utterly unable to. He’s weird and > clueless. And he’s obsessed with software freedom. Thank you, Barak. I agree with your observations, and find them an important contribution in this complex matter (and have tried several times but given up on trying to phrase something similar myself). Question is, this being a process to compose a ballot for a vote: How to transform those observations into a text for the ballot? Or if that is absurd, how else to proceed (other than shrug and let the boting process continue disregarding those observations? - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
