Re: Support RMS

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021, Máirín Duffy <[1]du...@redhat.com> wrote:

   Luke: this response is patronizing and an example of a failure to
   exercise empathy and assume an appropriate level of assertiveness in
   dialogue.



Mairin this is very valuable feedback for me which I genuinely
   appreciated.  I particularly loved how you mirrored my own words to me,
   that was both extremely funny and also hugely insightful at the same
   time.

   thank you.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:du...@redhat.com
   2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021, Thomas Lord <[1]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 Good.  Now let's spend a few months dissecting and discussing YOU
 TWO's psychology, personality, and so forth, your alleged vices,

   how long have you got? vices, mmm :)



 how you are tragic figures in our chin-stroking opinions,

   "sooo meester booond, we meet at laaast" oh wait, chin: not white
   fluffy cat.



  what authority systems we can use to prevent you from causing
 problems, and so on.

   dictatorship! enslavement! miiind control! facebook!



  That's why people sign up to the list, right?

but of course! (this being "sent from my iphone")

   i'm kidding, i wouldn't be seen dead with an iphone.

   was that sufficiently over-the-top to be 100% successfully classified
   as "humour"?  if not, i most sincerely apologise.

   l

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:l...@basiscraft.com
   2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: RMS is back on board

[gregor]

   hI all.

   firstly appologies for adding to this tempest in a cup of tea. As just
   recently stated by mr. Thomas Lord: "This list was not created for for
   endless discussion of RMS' or anyone else's alleged virtues or vices."

   secondly, thank you mr. Ali Reza Hayati for the post you've send the
   link of. let me  quote a bit of it:
   "If we don’t stand by our principals, which are based on justice, we’ll
   lose everything we have ever fought for. I highly oppose those who ask
   RMS and/or FSF board to resign."

   thirdly, i'd like to share my view on the matter.

   RMS is a genius and we, ordinary people can not aspire to totally
   comprehend the finished thoughts he expresses. Maybe the wittiness of
   his "sexist" jokes are a double parabole which reveals the corrupt side
   of our society and does it so in a "monty python-esque" way. But on us
   -  me, Debs, Aarons, Dannys and the rest (of "god damned
   easy-triggered, politically correct snowflakes"), the allegory is lost.

   Also, for us less principled ones, when we witness the outrage RMS can
   display over some trivia, it seems he is a deranged person. But it may
   just as well be, that we are the deranged ones, since we are not able
   to distinctively recognize injustice and lies (so we stay happily
   non-principal. it reminds me of a joke mr. Marx said once: i have this
   principle, if you don't like it, well, i have others ... was groucho
   marx ;)).

   And also; it all reminds me of a parallel universe in which the
   apostles voted jesus out, because he was so unkind to the money
   changers in the temple, he was rude, he didn't think of their families
   and was obnoxious.

   Lastly,

   truth shall prevail. :)

   g

   On 25. 03. 21 18:14, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:

 I wrote this blog post:
 [1]https://alirezahayati.com/2021/03/25/fight-against-idiocy-support
 -rms/
 Please send your support of RMS to [2]i...@fsf.org. This would be
 much appreciated.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
[3]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
[4]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

References

   1. https://alirezahayati.com/2021/03/25/fight-against-idiocy-support-rms/
   2. mailto:i...@fsf.org
   3. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
   4. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021, Aaron Wolf <[1]wolft...@riseup.net> wrote:

 make the difference. The various free software activists who have
 worked
 with RMS are not specifically experts on Asperger's or similar, so
 even
 if they *get* that he is that way, that doesn't mean they know how
 to
 deal with it.

   indeed. an independent profssional confirmation would allow them to do
   the research (collaboratively) and thus teach each other.

   until that happens they too are going to continue to struggle somewhat.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:wolft...@riseup.net
   2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

Good.  Now let's spend a few months dissecting and discussing YOU TWO's 
psychology, personality, and so forth, your alleged vices, how you are 
tragic figures in our chin-stroking opinions, what authority systems we 
can use to prevent you from causing problems, and so on.  That's why 
people sign up to the list, right?


-t



On 2021-03-26 23:13, Aaron Wolf wrote:

Thanks Luke, that's well said, and that's how I see things as well.

Except for the one detail that I'm not sure how much the people who 
have

been close to RMS are actually unaware. I suspect they see it clearly
too and that's one reason many of them spent years tolerating things 
and

working to help him. Perhaps if he were indeed diagnosed and had help
from people who understand his particular neurological style that would
make the difference. The various free software activists who have 
worked

with RMS are not specifically experts on Asperger's or similar, so even
if they *get* that he is that way, that doesn't mean they know how to
deal with it.

On 2021-03-26 10:58 p.m., Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021,
   <[1]libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org> wrote:

 and I'm not talking about the
 unfair out-of-context gotcha stuff, I'm talking about the pattern 
of
 awkward behavior the is both more subtle and persistent, the 
stuff

 that
 has discouraged many people over the years, people who dealt with
 him
 day-to-day.

   i have interacted with Dr Stallman for over 15 years.  over that 
time

   several things became abundantly clear to me:

   1) his hyperintelligence and attention to detail leaves you with
   absolutely no opportunity whatsoever to be ambiguous or unclear, in 
any

   way.  everyday words or acronyms that provide any opportunity for
   misunderatanding he will INSTANTLY pick up on and question.

   for people who lack patience this drives them up the f** wall.

   for those who have the patience it is an opportunity that i cannot
   fully express how valuable it is, to have access to someone who can
   teach you to be absolutely clear and succinct in communication.

   2) from the above, and much more, it is blindingly obvious that Dr
   Stallman has a form of Asperger's (just as i do).

   the problem is that every time i raise this with him, he denies it.

   i would very much appreciate it if others who recognise the clear
   symptoms and behavioural patterns that i do, to have a quiet word 
with

   him and advise him to get a proper independent diagnosis...

   ...,*and publish it*.

   someone from a professional background who confirms this 
independently
   will have a huge impact in silencing and stymying Dr Stallman's 
worst

   critics.

   how?

   because his critics and those actively seeking to destroy him are
   judging him by "normal" behavioural standards.

   no "normal" person literally dedicates their entire life in the way
   that he has to a cause that invites others to go absolutely 
ballistic

   because they look so ethically inferior to him by comparison, they
   cannot cope and seek to destroy him rather than accept *themselves* 
as

   they are.

   we accept Bill Gates and Richard Branson for who they are.  they 
both
   have Asperger's.  these are people whose behavioural quirks and 
speech
   patterns are accepted because they have been diagnosed with 
Asperger's

   and that has become public knowledge.

   people with Asperger's are the ones that change rhe world, because 
they

   DO NOT QUIT.

   i leave you with this quote:

   The Reason-able Man adapts himself to the world.

   The Un-Reason-able Man adapts the world to himself.

   Therefore, all progress depends on the Un-Reason-able Man.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
   2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss



___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss


___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021,
   <[1]libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org> wrote:

   Aaron wrote:



 across that way. I think avoiding that impression is helpful, and I
 hope
 she can consider your feedback for whatever utility it can bring her
 *even though* I think you were far too bold in how strongly you
 asserted
 your conclusions.



   Aaron this is hugely insightful and thoughtful.  yes, i am known for
   overstating things: the lense i see the world through has a dial that
   is superglued to "11", again this is part of Asperger's that i have to
   live with.

   a strongly stated perspective has a key advantage: it invites people to
   consider it, by comparison, against their own, and to learn new
   insights from the difference.

   this (Deb) is what i warmly invite you to do.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
   2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Aaron Wolf]

Thanks Luke, that's well said, and that's how I see things as well.

Except for the one detail that I'm not sure how much the people who have
been close to RMS are actually unaware. I suspect they see it clearly
too and that's one reason many of them spent years tolerating things and
working to help him. Perhaps if he were indeed diagnosed and had help
from people who understand his particular neurological style that would
make the difference. The various free software activists who have worked
with RMS are not specifically experts on Asperger's or similar, so even
if they *get* that he is that way, that doesn't mean they know how to
deal with it.

On 2021-03-26 10:58 p.m., Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>On Saturday, March 27, 2021,
><[1]libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org> wrote:
> 
>  and I'm not talking about the
>  unfair out-of-context gotcha stuff, I'm talking about the pattern of
>  awkward behavior the is both more subtle and persistent, the stuff
>  that
>  has discouraged many people over the years, people who dealt with
>  him
>  day-to-day.
> 
>i have interacted with Dr Stallman for over 15 years.  over that time
>several things became abundantly clear to me:
> 
>1) his hyperintelligence and attention to detail leaves you with
>absolutely no opportunity whatsoever to be ambiguous or unclear, in any
>way.  everyday words or acronyms that provide any opportunity for
>misunderatanding he will INSTANTLY pick up on and question.
> 
>for people who lack patience this drives them up the f** wall.
> 
>for those who have the patience it is an opportunity that i cannot
>fully express how valuable it is, to have access to someone who can
>teach you to be absolutely clear and succinct in communication.
> 
>2) from the above, and much more, it is blindingly obvious that Dr
>Stallman has a form of Asperger's (just as i do).
> 
>the problem is that every time i raise this with him, he denies it.
> 
>i would very much appreciate it if others who recognise the clear
>symptoms and behavioural patterns that i do, to have a quiet word with
>him and advise him to get a proper independent diagnosis...
> 
>...,*and publish it*.
> 
>someone from a professional background who confirms this independently
>will have a huge impact in silencing and stymying Dr Stallman's worst
>critics.
> 
>how?
> 
>because his critics and those actively seeking to destroy him are
>judging him by "normal" behavioural standards.
> 
>no "normal" person literally dedicates their entire life in the way
>that he has to a cause that invites others to go absolutely ballistic
>because they look so ethically inferior to him by comparison, they
>cannot cope and seek to destroy him rather than accept *themselves* as
>they are.
> 
>we accept Bill Gates and Richard Branson for who they are.  they both
>have Asperger's.  these are people whose behavioural quirks and speech
>patterns are accepted because they have been diagnosed with Asperger's
>and that has become public knowledge.
> 
>people with Asperger's are the ones that change rhe world, because they
>DO NOT QUIT.
> 
>i leave you with this quote:
> 
>The Reason-able Man adapts himself to the world.
> 
>The Un-Reason-able Man adapts the world to himself.
> 
>Therefore, all progress depends on the Un-Reason-able Man.
> 
>l.
> 
>--
>---
>crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
>[2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
> 
> References
> 
>1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
>2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
> 
> 
> ___
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
> 

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: peer to peer global decentralized, distributed multi-media hypertext

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021, Thomas Lord <[1]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 None of the systems you named fit what I described, which is a
 network of explicit peering (each node chooses and cooperates with
 peers), using rsync to propagate multi-media hypertext.  Period.

   fantastic.

   then do consider putting in a funding request to NLnet to help validate
   that, and to financially support you and anyone else wishing to
   complete the work.

   also do look up rproxy, developed by martin pool, 21 years ago.  martin
   abandoned it because gzip compression interfered with it.  i never got
   round to suggesting to unzip the request before applying rhe rsync
   algorithm.

   the rsync algorithm was andrew tridgell's phd work into parallel
   computing.  rsync was merely the example implementation.  martin
   decided to apply the algorithm to HTTP traffic.  rproxy was the result.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:l...@basiscraft.com
   2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021,
   <[1]libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org> wrote:

 and I'm not talking about the
 unfair out-of-context gotcha stuff, I'm talking about the pattern of
 awkward behavior the is both more subtle and persistent, the stuff
 that
 has discouraged many people over the years, people who dealt with
 him
 day-to-day.

   i have interacted with Dr Stallman for over 15 years.  over that time
   several things became abundantly clear to me:

   1) his hyperintelligence and attention to detail leaves you with
   absolutely no opportunity whatsoever to be ambiguous or unclear, in any
   way.  everyday words or acronyms that provide any opportunity for
   misunderatanding he will INSTANTLY pick up on and question.

   for people who lack patience this drives them up the f** wall.

   for those who have the patience it is an opportunity that i cannot
   fully express how valuable it is, to have access to someone who can
   teach you to be absolutely clear and succinct in communication.

   2) from the above, and much more, it is blindingly obvious that Dr
   Stallman has a form of Asperger's (just as i do).

   the problem is that every time i raise this with him, he denies it.

   i would very much appreciate it if others who recognise the clear
   symptoms and behavioural patterns that i do, to have a quiet word with
   him and advise him to get a proper independent diagnosis...

   ...,*and publish it*.

   someone from a professional background who confirms this independently
   will have a huge impact in silencing and stymying Dr Stallman's worst
   critics.

   how?

   because his critics and those actively seeking to destroy him are
   judging him by "normal" behavioural standards.

   no "normal" person literally dedicates their entire life in the way
   that he has to a cause that invites others to go absolutely ballistic
   because they look so ethically inferior to him by comparison, they
   cannot cope and seek to destroy him rather than accept *themselves* as
   they are.

   we accept Bill Gates and Richard Branson for who they are.  they both
   have Asperger's.  these are people whose behavioural quirks and speech
   patterns are accepted because they have been diagnosed with Asperger's
   and that has become public knowledge.

   people with Asperger's are the ones that change rhe world, because they
   DO NOT QUIT.

   i leave you with this quote:

   The Reason-able Man adapts himself to the world.

   The Un-Reason-able Man adapts the world to himself.

   Therefore, all progress depends on the Un-Reason-able Man.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [2]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
   2. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

I'll be blunt as well:

This list was not created for for endless discussion of RMS' or anyone 
else's alleged virtues or vices.  I haven't engaged with you on those 
questions because they don't belong here.


-t


On 2021-03-26 22:47, Aaron Wolf wrote:

Thomas, I'll be blunt and clear here: You seem to believe that I oppose
RMS and just agree with the people who want him ousted. You are wrong.

You seem not to be recognizing that this community includes people who
are neither on the side of defend-RMS-and-reject-all-attacks nor the
side of RMS-is-an-awful-bigot-who-must-go.

You have not engaged with anything I'm saying, you seem to treat it all
as if I'm trying to use crafty language to argue for what you see as 
the

opposing viewpoint. You haven't bothered to check how much we actually
even disagree.

In all the replies in which you suggest that things are *only* absurd 
or
*only* black-and-white, you are simply denying the messy complex 
reality.


Ask everyone else. I guarantee you will easily find people who you
recognize as on *your* side of the argument who can also tell you flat
out that what I'm saying here is constructive, nuanced, and helpful.

Not everyone who supports RMS is in quite as defensive a state as you
currently appear to be.

If you want to ignore me, you can do so. Or if you want to understand 
my

positions and engage respectfully, we can go in that direction.


On 2021-03-26 7:50 p.m., Thomas Lord wrote:
I think I have made it quite clear, Aaron, that I don't believe you 
are

doing more here than wasting still more of everyone's time, rehashing
the same old assertions on a list not established for that purpose,
picking at scabs.   I can't tell whether you are malicious or just
confused but either way

If you feel as strongly as you seem to say you do, perhaps it is time 
to
disassociate yourself from the FSF and GNU.   Since I doubt you wish 
to

do either, please accept that endless re-litigation serves nobody here
in this specific context.



-t




On 2021-03-26 19:29, Aaron Wolf wrote:
Thomas, you are using the fact that *some* accusations have not held 
up

to scrutiny in order to conclude that all accusations have been
scrutinized and not held up.

I wonder if you would be more gracious if the accusers did more to
emphasize both the unfair aspects of some accusations and emphasized 
the
positive aspects of RMS. But I'm not optimistic. You don't seem at 
all
interested in considering whether there are really valid concerns 
here.


FWIW, I acknowledge how hard it is, especially at a distance, to make
sense of claims that RMS is sexist (and worse) when he has for years
gone out of his way to express support for feminist political causes 
in

terms of highlighting news articles or talking about principles.

Accepting for this comment that his behavior really has been what Deb
and others describe in their experiences (I have done the scrutiny 
and
all their concerns have held up as far as I could scrutinize)… I 
don't
think RMS is a hypocrite as much as he is oblivious. I mean, I 
suspect

maybe in some fundamental way, he doesn't quite *get* the issues with
his own behavior.

Perhaps in his mind, none of the ways he flirted with women or made
jokes etc., maybe none of that fit into the concepts that he 
recognized

as sexist, and his own honest awareness of sexism and its problems in
society and policy just seemed distinct. Put simply: he doesn't
recognize his problems because he doesn't do the *type* of sexist
behavior/talking that he recognizes as bad and criticizes in others 
(if

he did *that*, then it would be hypocritical).

I happen also to basically agree with the sentiment that RMS is 
widely

misunderstood, and the style of accusation we commonly see is a
non-understanding one. But that's not enough to disregard the ways 
his
behavior has caused harm to the movement — and I'm not talking about 
the

unfair out-of-context gotcha stuff, I'm talking about the pattern of
awkward behavior the is both more subtle and persistent, the stuff 
that

has discouraged many people over the years, people who dealt with him
day-to-day.

Thomas, at least in principle, if you had the opportunity to have a
private discussion with a man who worked closely with RMS for years 
and
who could explain his history of issues while acknowledging RMS's 
genius
and significance, would you be open to learning from that? Or would 
you

just reject the opportunity because you are already sure you know all
you need to know?

Although I would like to believe that I'd always be open-minded as a
personal habit, it happens that what got me to recognize the issues 
more
fully is precisely that I have had the opportunity to know and talk 
to

people close to RMS. My *inclination* otherwise is to be skeptical of
the critics because I very much recognize RMS's good intentions and
fundamentally strong ethical foundations in his worldview. I still 
see

those things today, even though I don't deny the 

Re: Support RMS

[Aaron Wolf]

Thomas, I'll be blunt and clear here: You seem to believe that I oppose
RMS and just agree with the people who want him ousted. You are wrong.

You seem not to be recognizing that this community includes people who
are neither on the side of defend-RMS-and-reject-all-attacks nor the
side of RMS-is-an-awful-bigot-who-must-go.

You have not engaged with anything I'm saying, you seem to treat it all
as if I'm trying to use crafty language to argue for what you see as the
opposing viewpoint. You haven't bothered to check how much we actually
even disagree.

In all the replies in which you suggest that things are *only* absurd or
*only* black-and-white, you are simply denying the messy complex reality.

Ask everyone else. I guarantee you will easily find people who you
recognize as on *your* side of the argument who can also tell you flat
out that what I'm saying here is constructive, nuanced, and helpful.

Not everyone who supports RMS is in quite as defensive a state as you
currently appear to be.

If you want to ignore me, you can do so. Or if you want to understand my
positions and engage respectfully, we can go in that direction.


On 2021-03-26 7:50 p.m., Thomas Lord wrote:
> I think I have made it quite clear, Aaron, that I don't believe you are
> doing more here than wasting still more of everyone's time, rehashing
> the same old assertions on a list not established for that purpose,
> picking at scabs.   I can't tell whether you are malicious or just
> confused but either way
> 
> If you feel as strongly as you seem to say you do, perhaps it is time to
> disassociate yourself from the FSF and GNU.   Since I doubt you wish to
> do either, please accept that endless re-litigation serves nobody here
> in this specific context.
> 
> 
> 
> -t
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2021-03-26 19:29, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> Thomas, you are using the fact that *some* accusations have not held up
>> to scrutiny in order to conclude that all accusations have been
>> scrutinized and not held up.
>>
>> I wonder if you would be more gracious if the accusers did more to
>> emphasize both the unfair aspects of some accusations and emphasized the
>> positive aspects of RMS. But I'm not optimistic. You don't seem at all
>> interested in considering whether there are really valid concerns here.
>>
>> FWIW, I acknowledge how hard it is, especially at a distance, to make
>> sense of claims that RMS is sexist (and worse) when he has for years
>> gone out of his way to express support for feminist political causes in
>> terms of highlighting news articles or talking about principles.
>>
>> Accepting for this comment that his behavior really has been what Deb
>> and others describe in their experiences (I have done the scrutiny and
>> all their concerns have held up as far as I could scrutinize)… I don't
>> think RMS is a hypocrite as much as he is oblivious. I mean, I suspect
>> maybe in some fundamental way, he doesn't quite *get* the issues with
>> his own behavior.
>>
>> Perhaps in his mind, none of the ways he flirted with women or made
>> jokes etc., maybe none of that fit into the concepts that he recognized
>> as sexist, and his own honest awareness of sexism and its problems in
>> society and policy just seemed distinct. Put simply: he doesn't
>> recognize his problems because he doesn't do the *type* of sexist
>> behavior/talking that he recognizes as bad and criticizes in others (if
>> he did *that*, then it would be hypocritical).
>>
>> I happen also to basically agree with the sentiment that RMS is widely
>> misunderstood, and the style of accusation we commonly see is a
>> non-understanding one. But that's not enough to disregard the ways his
>> behavior has caused harm to the movement — and I'm not talking about the
>> unfair out-of-context gotcha stuff, I'm talking about the pattern of
>> awkward behavior the is both more subtle and persistent, the stuff that
>> has discouraged many people over the years, people who dealt with him
>> day-to-day.
>>
>> Thomas, at least in principle, if you had the opportunity to have a
>> private discussion with a man who worked closely with RMS for years and
>> who could explain his history of issues while acknowledging RMS's genius
>> and significance, would you be open to learning from that? Or would you
>> just reject the opportunity because you are already sure you know all
>> you need to know?
>>
>> Although I would like to believe that I'd always be open-minded as a
>> personal habit, it happens that what got me to recognize the issues more
>> fully is precisely that I have had the opportunity to know and talk to
>> people close to RMS. My *inclination* otherwise is to be skeptical of
>> the critics because I very much recognize RMS's good intentions and
>> fundamentally strong ethical foundations in his worldview. I still see
>> those things today, even though I don't deny the problem behaviors.
>>
>> On 2021-03-26 5:16 p.m., Thomas Lord wrote:
>>>
>>> This has gotten beyond absurd.  For y

Re: peer to peer global decentralized, distributed multi-media hypertext

[Thomas Lord]

None of the systems you named fit what I described, which is a
network of explicit peering (each node chooses and cooperates with
peers), using rsync to propagate multi-media hypertext.  Period.

-t



On 2021-03-26 22:27, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

On Saturday, March 27, 2021, <[1]libreplanet-discuss-request@
   libreplanet.org> wrote:

 From: Thomas Lord <[2]l...@basiscraft.com>
 Message-ID: <[3]6bc558831387fffe03f01cf7bfa71...@basiscraft.com>
 Has anyone explored a new approach to multi-media hypertext -- one
 not
 tied to centralized servers -- along the following, simple lines:
 Such a system seems like an obvious step and a timely one to me, 
but

 is
 anyone already doing it?  Would anyone like to start now?

   there are indeed, Thomas.  FileMax, Holochain, Threefold,
   P2pFoundation, Bitchute, gnunet, these are all efforts with varying
   success and focus.

   technically speaking, true peer distrbuted services are insanely 
hard

   to get right (and even harder to convince people to adopt).  some
   people have worked on this for fifteen years and yet there is no one
   clear "winner".

   whilst i do not wish to discourage you or others, i would not want 
you
   to waste time duplicating something that will suck your time and 
energy

   needlessly from other equally important (unrelated) tasks.

   to ensure that you (and others) focus on *useful* tasks, i have a
   suggestion: do the research and put in a request for funding to 
NLnet.


   rhe reason i say that is not just because it will give you the
   financial resources to see through your goal, NLnet backs well
   researched *non duplicated* efforts and will help you by confirming
   whether there are existing projects out there.  you can start by
   checking on their website under "projects" and may find one already 
in

   progress to which you can usefully contribute.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [4]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
   2. mailto:l...@basiscraft.com
   3. mailto:6bc558831387fffe03f01cf7bfa71...@basiscraft.com
   4. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss


___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Aaron Wolf]

Luke, I appreciate your mention of the CRNHQ stuff. I have not seen that
exact material before but many other things like it. I agree
wholeheartedly that this sort of recognition of victim mentality is
important.

Another framing is to say that we can have a TO-ME attitude (victim
consciousness) or a BY-ME (creator consciousness) or yet more higher
consciousness perspectives like THROUGH-ME (going with the flow and not
making it about ourselves and our egos).

All that said, I don't think you have enough knowledge of Deb and what
she is saying to diagnose her state here. One principle worth
remembering is to "eat your projections", if you see someone else having
an issue (e.g. victim consciousness), it's a prompt to check if you are
doing that and to work on making sure to avoid it yourself.

When giving advice to others, it helps to ask questions, to get curious,
to use language like, "I wonder if you might be having a victim mindset
here. Are you suggesting that you feel wronged and want others to take
action to resolve your tensions?" (that's a rough first quick suggested
language, far from ideal)

I should eat my own ideas and use questions myself. Are you imagining
that Deb's emphasis on her own experience is designed or effectively
setting her in a victim role?

Partly because I know Deb, my own interpretation is that she does not
feel like a victim at all. I suspect she's done her due diligence
processing her own thoughtful take-responsibility approach to her own
situation. I think she's sharing her perspective here for the sake of
telling others about problems she sees that affect others in our
movement and that have the consequence of losing valuable members who
leave the movement or do not join.

I have had a decent number of interactions with RMS, and none of them
particularly bothered me personally. So, I'm not from any sort of
victim-mentality when I suggest the concerns are real and shouldn't be
minimized.

I think it's a simple matter. RMS has pros and cons in his effect on the
movement. Do the pros outweigh the cons? Maybe they do for participation
of RMS more than leadership in a Board role? I was happy to hear him
*speak* at LibrePlanet, I like hearing his thoughts. What should we do
to be as objective as we can at evaluating these questions? I suggest
one step is to take seriously the *input* from various sources whether
or not they are in some victim-consciousness (though we could take that
into account).

Again, I think the victim-mentality issues are widespread, rampant,
these days. And probably even in a case like Deb's, they aren't 100%
absent, we all have reactivity that comes and goes. But I really suspect
that it applies very little to Deb in this case and in her posts here —
even though I have no hesitation to suggest to Deb that she can come
across that way. I think avoiding that impression is helpful, and I hope
she can consider your feedback for whatever utility it can bring her
*even though* I think you were far too bold in how strongly you asserted
your conclusions.

Respectfully,
Aaron

On 2021-03-26 10:08 p.m., Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>On Saturday, March 27, 2021,
><[1]libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org> wrote:
> 
>  From: Deb Nicholson <[2]d...@eximiousproductions.com>
>  Well, it's disappointing but not surprising that a call for
>  improving the
>  way people are treated within the free software movement is being
>  seen by
>  some on this list as "hateful" or somehow in "opposition to free
>  software."
>  I honestly don't see how creating a haven for sexist behavior and
>  disrespect can lead to the movement's growth, but maybe I'm mistaken
>  in
>  thinking that we all want that growth.
> 
>Deb: this response is resigned self-victimisation and conflation of
>unrelated points rolled into one.
> 
>it is a sufficiently well recognised behavioural pattern as part of
>conflict that CRNHQ has a special section on it, "Cooperative Power"
> 
> [3]https://www.crnhq.org/cr-kit/
> 
>Can I recommend that you read that for insights because whilst it is
>clear that, like all of us here, you seek to further Software Freedom,
>you are engaging in "Victim" patterns that are causing division amongst
>your peers, rather than creating the collaborative and welcoming
>environment that you and all here would clearly love to see.
> 
>I trust that you will give this some thought and due attention for
>future interactions with others who share the same Software Freedom
>goals.
> 
>Much respect,
> 
>l.
> 
>--
>---
>crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
>[4]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
> 
> References
> 
>1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
>2. mailto:d...@eximiousproductions.com
>3. https://www.crnhq.org/cr-kit/
>4. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
> 
> 
> ___
>

Re: peer to peer global decentralized, distributed multi-media hypertext

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021, <[1]libreplanet-discuss-request@
   libreplanet.org> wrote:

 From: Thomas Lord <[2]l...@basiscraft.com>
 Message-ID: <[3]6bc558831387fffe03f01cf7bfa71...@basiscraft.com>
 Has anyone explored a new approach to multi-media hypertext -- one
 not
 tied to centralized servers -- along the following, simple lines:
 Such a system seems like an obvious step and a timely one to me, but
 is
 anyone already doing it?  Would anyone like to start now?

   there are indeed, Thomas.  FileMax, Holochain, Threefold,
   P2pFoundation, Bitchute, gnunet, these are all efforts with varying
   success and focus.

   technically speaking, true peer distrbuted services are insanely hard
   to get right (and even harder to convince people to adopt).  some
   people have worked on this for fifteen years and yet there is no one
   clear "winner".

   whilst i do not wish to discourage you or others, i would not want you
   to waste time duplicating something that will suck your time and energy
   needlessly from other equally important (unrelated) tasks.

   to ensure that you (and others) focus on *useful* tasks, i have a
   suggestion: do the research and put in a request for funding to NLnet.

   rhe reason i say that is not just because it will give you the
   financial resources to see through your goal, NLnet backs well
   researched *non duplicated* efforts and will help you by confirming
   whether there are existing projects out there.  you can start by
   checking on their website under "projects" and may find one already in
   progress to which you can usefully contribute.

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [4]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
   2. mailto:l...@basiscraft.com
   3. mailto:6bc558831387fffe03f01cf7bfa71...@basiscraft.com
   4. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

   On Saturday, March 27, 2021,
   <[1]libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org> wrote:

 From: Deb Nicholson <[2]d...@eximiousproductions.com>
 Well, it's disappointing but not surprising that a call for
 improving the
 way people are treated within the free software movement is being
 seen by
 some on this list as "hateful" or somehow in "opposition to free
 software."
 I honestly don't see how creating a haven for sexist behavior and
 disrespect can lead to the movement's growth, but maybe I'm mistaken
 in
 thinking that we all want that growth.

   Deb: this response is resigned self-victimisation and conflation of
   unrelated points rolled into one.

   it is a sufficiently well recognised behavioural pattern as part of
   conflict that CRNHQ has a special section on it, "Cooperative Power"

[3]https://www.crnhq.org/cr-kit/

   Can I recommend that you read that for insights because whilst it is
   clear that, like all of us here, you seek to further Software Freedom,
   you are engaging in "Victim" patterns that are causing division amongst
   your peers, rather than creating the collaborative and welcoming
   environment that you and all here would clearly love to see.

   I trust that you will give this some thought and due attention for
   future interactions with others who share the same Software Freedom
   goals.

   Much respect,

   l.

   --
   ---
   crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:
   [4]https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68

References

   1. mailto:libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
   2. mailto:d...@eximiousproductions.com
   3. https://www.crnhq.org/cr-kit/
   4. https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

I think I have made it quite clear, Aaron, that I don't believe you are 
doing more here than wasting still more of everyone's time, rehashing 
the same old assertions on a list not established for that purpose, 
picking at scabs.   I can't tell whether you are malicious or just 
confused but either way


If you feel as strongly as you seem to say you do, perhaps it is time to 
disassociate yourself from the FSF and GNU.   Since I doubt you wish to 
do either, please accept that endless re-litigation serves nobody here 
in this specific context.




-t




On 2021-03-26 19:29, Aaron Wolf wrote:

Thomas, you are using the fact that *some* accusations have not held up
to scrutiny in order to conclude that all accusations have been
scrutinized and not held up.

I wonder if you would be more gracious if the accusers did more to
emphasize both the unfair aspects of some accusations and emphasized 
the

positive aspects of RMS. But I'm not optimistic. You don't seem at all
interested in considering whether there are really valid concerns here.

FWIW, I acknowledge how hard it is, especially at a distance, to make
sense of claims that RMS is sexist (and worse) when he has for years
gone out of his way to express support for feminist political causes in
terms of highlighting news articles or talking about principles.

Accepting for this comment that his behavior really has been what Deb
and others describe in their experiences (I have done the scrutiny and
all their concerns have held up as far as I could scrutinize)… I don't
think RMS is a hypocrite as much as he is oblivious. I mean, I suspect
maybe in some fundamental way, he doesn't quite *get* the issues with
his own behavior.

Perhaps in his mind, none of the ways he flirted with women or made
jokes etc., maybe none of that fit into the concepts that he recognized
as sexist, and his own honest awareness of sexism and its problems in
society and policy just seemed distinct. Put simply: he doesn't
recognize his problems because he doesn't do the *type* of sexist
behavior/talking that he recognizes as bad and criticizes in others (if
he did *that*, then it would be hypocritical).

I happen also to basically agree with the sentiment that RMS is widely
misunderstood, and the style of accusation we commonly see is a
non-understanding one. But that's not enough to disregard the ways his
behavior has caused harm to the movement — and I'm not talking about 
the

unfair out-of-context gotcha stuff, I'm talking about the pattern of
awkward behavior the is both more subtle and persistent, the stuff that
has discouraged many people over the years, people who dealt with him
day-to-day.

Thomas, at least in principle, if you had the opportunity to have a
private discussion with a man who worked closely with RMS for years and
who could explain his history of issues while acknowledging RMS's 
genius

and significance, would you be open to learning from that? Or would you
just reject the opportunity because you are already sure you know all
you need to know?

Although I would like to believe that I'd always be open-minded as a
personal habit, it happens that what got me to recognize the issues 
more

fully is precisely that I have had the opportunity to know and talk to
people close to RMS. My *inclination* otherwise is to be skeptical of
the critics because I very much recognize RMS's good intentions and
fundamentally strong ethical foundations in his worldview. I still see
those things today, even though I don't deny the problem behaviors.

On 2021-03-26 5:16 p.m., Thomas Lord wrote:


This has gotten beyond absurd.  For years, this list has not been used
discuss developments, share projects, or even coordionate 
transportation

and lodging.  It has been dominated by a few people making the same
accusations again and again, and having others push back.   The
accusations have never held up to scrutiny, even though we can assume
some people make them with full sincerity.

Enough already.

-t



On 2021-03-26 16:03, Deb Nicholson wrote:

Well, it's disappointing but not surprising that a call for improving
   the way people are treated within the free software movement is 
being
   seen by some on this list as "hateful" or somehow in "opposition 
to
   free software." I honestly don't see how creating a haven for 
sexist
   behavior and disrespect can lead to the movement's growth, but 
maybe

   I'm mistaken in thinking that we all want that growth.
   I am grateful to those who are interested in working towards an
   inclusive and non-toxic future for the free software movement. 
Maybe
   I'll get to work with you all someday on one of the projects that 
is

   interested in growing the free software movement.
   Best,
   Deb

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:03 PM Jean Louis  
wrote:


 * Deb Nicholson <[1]d...@eximiousproductions.com> [2021-03-26 
16:52]:
 >    An interesting thing about men who harass women is that 
they

 usually
 >    don't do it to men.

Re: Support RMS

[Aaron Wolf]

Thomas, you are using the fact that *some* accusations have not held up
to scrutiny in order to conclude that all accusations have been
scrutinized and not held up.

I wonder if you would be more gracious if the accusers did more to
emphasize both the unfair aspects of some accusations and emphasized the
positive aspects of RMS. But I'm not optimistic. You don't seem at all
interested in considering whether there are really valid concerns here.

FWIW, I acknowledge how hard it is, especially at a distance, to make
sense of claims that RMS is sexist (and worse) when he has for years
gone out of his way to express support for feminist political causes in
terms of highlighting news articles or talking about principles.

Accepting for this comment that his behavior really has been what Deb
and others describe in their experiences (I have done the scrutiny and
all their concerns have held up as far as I could scrutinize)… I don't
think RMS is a hypocrite as much as he is oblivious. I mean, I suspect
maybe in some fundamental way, he doesn't quite *get* the issues with
his own behavior.

Perhaps in his mind, none of the ways he flirted with women or made
jokes etc., maybe none of that fit into the concepts that he recognized
as sexist, and his own honest awareness of sexism and its problems in
society and policy just seemed distinct. Put simply: he doesn't
recognize his problems because he doesn't do the *type* of sexist
behavior/talking that he recognizes as bad and criticizes in others (if
he did *that*, then it would be hypocritical).

I happen also to basically agree with the sentiment that RMS is widely
misunderstood, and the style of accusation we commonly see is a
non-understanding one. But that's not enough to disregard the ways his
behavior has caused harm to the movement — and I'm not talking about the
unfair out-of-context gotcha stuff, I'm talking about the pattern of
awkward behavior the is both more subtle and persistent, the stuff that
has discouraged many people over the years, people who dealt with him
day-to-day.

Thomas, at least in principle, if you had the opportunity to have a
private discussion with a man who worked closely with RMS for years and
who could explain his history of issues while acknowledging RMS's genius
and significance, would you be open to learning from that? Or would you
just reject the opportunity because you are already sure you know all
you need to know?

Although I would like to believe that I'd always be open-minded as a
personal habit, it happens that what got me to recognize the issues more
fully is precisely that I have had the opportunity to know and talk to
people close to RMS. My *inclination* otherwise is to be skeptical of
the critics because I very much recognize RMS's good intentions and
fundamentally strong ethical foundations in his worldview. I still see
those things today, even though I don't deny the problem behaviors.

On 2021-03-26 5:16 p.m., Thomas Lord wrote:
> 
> This has gotten beyond absurd.  For years, this list has not been used
> discuss developments, share projects, or even coordionate transportation
> and lodging.  It has been dominated by a few people making the same
> accusations again and again, and having others push back.   The
> accusations have never held up to scrutiny, even though we can assume
> some people make them with full sincerity.
> 
> Enough already.
> 
> -t
> 
> 
> 
> On 2021-03-26 16:03, Deb Nicholson wrote:
>> Well, it's disappointing but not surprising that a call for improving
>>    the way people are treated within the free software movement is being
>>    seen by some on this list as "hateful" or somehow in "opposition to
>>    free software." I honestly don't see how creating a haven for sexist
>>    behavior and disrespect can lead to the movement's growth, but maybe
>>    I'm mistaken in thinking that we all want that growth.
>>    I am grateful to those who are interested in working towards an
>>    inclusive and non-toxic future for the free software movement. Maybe
>>    I'll get to work with you all someday on one of the projects that is
>>    interested in growing the free software movement.
>>    Best,
>>    Deb
>>
>>    On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:03 PM Jean Louis  wrote:
>>
>>  * Deb Nicholson <[1]d...@eximiousproductions.com> [2021-03-26 16:52]:
>>  >    An interesting thing about men who harass women is that they
>>  usually
>>  >    don't do it to men. Men who let the community know that they
>>  "don't
>>  >    believe in harassment" are the last people to find out it's
>>  happening,
>>  >    because no one feels safe telling them.
>>  Generalization without end.
>>  Why are you sending accusations to this mailing list? How is this
>>  mailing list to defend your rights? Or is your only purpose to
>>  divide
>>  and bring more hate here?
>>
>> References
>>
>>    1. mailto:d...@eximiousproductions.com
>>
>> 

Re: Support RMS

[Aaron Wolf]

I was referring to Deb Nicholson's post here on LibrePlanet. In other
words, her speaking up about concerns around RMS is *not* a pattern of
dogpiling in some public thing signaling your side. Instead, Deb came
here where she knows many people are not sympathetic to her concerns,
and she took the time to carefully express her position. And she didn't
just repeat the unfair attacks that got attention before, she discussed
other and more nuanced concerns around her own years of personal
experience with FSF and so on.

I didn't mean "presentation" in terms of a video talk or something.

On 2021-03-26 2:11 p.m., Jean Louis wrote:
> * Aaron Wolf  [2021-03-26 18:56]:
>> 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.
> 
> Which one was presented? One? I am not aware of presentation.
> 

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

peer to peer global decentralized, distributed multi-media hypertext

[Thomas Lord]

   We have seen in cases like social media, Internet advertising, and so
   on the following examples of attacks on freedom (in no particular
   order):

   * CSS hacks that hide what is going on in a web page to fool users.

   * Javascript hacks that are non-free code and that spy on users, but
   without which various (dis-)services don't work.

   * The false security of a web that uses domain names as tokens of
   authority -- e.g. the ability of Facebook to track a person's use of
   the web in general, simply because they are able to store cookies keyed
   on the Facebook domain names.

   Many people have, as I think we all know, thought that distributed and
   decentralized systems are more liberating.   Mastadon is one example of
   a system that has achieved some success, starting from that idea.

   Has anyone explored a new approach to multi-media hypertext -- one not
   tied to centralized servers -- along the following, simple lines:
   A peer-to-peer network (each node linked by choice to specific,
   mostly-trusted peers)...

   Using rsync as the underlying transport mechanism...

   With established conventions about how to share the namespace, do links
   between separately published documents, etc. 

   With display customizations (analogous to CSS) and active behaviors
   (Javascript) NOT embedded to content, but selected by users similarly
   to how people install and use Emacs Major Modes that they trust?
   Such a system seems like an obvious step and a timely one to me, but is
   anyone already doing it?  Would anyone like to start now?

   -t
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

This has gotten beyond absurd.  For years, this list has not been used 
discuss developments, share projects, or even coordionate transportation 
and lodging.  It has been dominated by a few people making the same 
accusations again and again, and having others push back.   The 
accusations have never held up to scrutiny, even though we can assume 
some people make them with full sincerity.


Enough already.

-t



On 2021-03-26 16:03, Deb Nicholson wrote:

Well, it's disappointing but not surprising that a call for improving
   the way people are treated within the free software movement is 
being

   seen by some on this list as "hateful" or somehow in "opposition to
   free software." I honestly don't see how creating a haven for sexist
   behavior and disrespect can lead to the movement's growth, but maybe
   I'm mistaken in thinking that we all want that growth.
   I am grateful to those who are interested in working towards an
   inclusive and non-toxic future for the free software movement. Maybe
   I'll get to work with you all someday on one of the projects that is
   interested in growing the free software movement.
   Best,
   Deb

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:03 PM Jean Louis  wrote:

 * Deb Nicholson <[1]d...@eximiousproductions.com> [2021-03-26 
16:52]:

 >An interesting thing about men who harass women is that they
 usually
 >don't do it to men. Men who let the community know that they
 "don't
 >believe in harassment" are the last people to find out it's
 happening,
 >because no one feels safe telling them.
 Generalization without end.
 Why are you sending accusations to this mailing list? How is this
 mailing list to defend your rights? Or is your only purpose to
 divide
 and bring more hate here?

References

   1. mailto:d...@eximiousproductions.com

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss


___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

2010 Trenton Computer Festival breakdown doesn't approach the issues under discussion

[J.B. Nicholson]

murph wrote:

I'd like to share an experience of mine with Richard Stallman, and
some reflections on the current situation.

In about 2010 or so, I went to the Trenton Computer Festival.  Richard
was slated to talk.  It was a treat to have him speak close to home
for me.  I also noticed that he was listed as a leader in Open Source,
and I thought that it would be amusing to see how he would react to
that.  Maybe some witty barbs, and an explanation of the difference
between the Free and Open movements, as a learning experience for the
organizers, as well as the audience.

I was wrong.  It was not amusing.



What was wrong was listing RMS as something that was not then nor is now true. RMS 
has a habit of sending organizations a document detailing terms on which he'll agree 
to speak at functions like this. He's very clear to include verbiage on how to 
properly address his work. I'm guessing that the Trenton Computer Festival organizers 
received a copy and didn't read it or they chose to ignore it.


What would have been more kind to him in your reaction is to understand that 2010 he 
had spent most of his life working on the free software social movement (founding it, 
working on licenses, programs, and books for its benefit, and all along the way 
advocating on its behalf for decades). A better way to find out how he would react 
would be to ask him in an interview what he makes of the open source development 
methodology or to ask him how free software and open source differ.


By 2010 the Trenton Computer Festival organizers and anyone else could have also read 
at least two essays on this topic:


Older essay:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html

Newer essay:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html


When Richard was on stage, and found out about the "Open Source"
moniker, he was outraged.  I don't recall his words of over a decade
ago, but I thought I recall more than a little cursing.  Regardless of
the exact words, it was unbecoming of someone of his stature.  It was
less statesman, and more temper tantrum.



Your reaction in this story contains nothing critical of the Trenton Computer 
Festival. They deserve some bad press on that, particularly for someone who has held 
on to that grudge over a decade later. I see no such indication in your story and I 
find that telling since it was their wrong description that initiated this entire story.


Or how about Linus Torvalds' well-known cursing: I've never seen anyone extend this 
kind of reaction to the Linux kernel or any of its contributors when Linus Torvalds 
said harsh words to programmers who didn't meet Torvalds' expectations for quality work.


Stallman is assigned the burden of having to not only have his work misrepresented (I 
assure you that's not the first time that has happened), but his reaction to the 2010 
Trenton Computer Festival is being used as an excuse to cast aspersions on his board 
membership to the FSF over a decade later. This effectively joins up with an effort 
which, in a completely separate letter from yours, tries to argue for all of us to 
also "refuse to contribute to projects related to the FSF and RMS" which is a huge 
overreach and opportunistic power grab which would end up punishing many others.



I walked away that day, not energized about supporting Free Software,
but instead thinking about the man that was in the front of the room
talking about it.  Was this the right person to further that cause?



Yes he is as are anyone else who actually argues for free software. As to his being 
upset, we'll all have moments where we are flustered and not at our best, and that's 
all you're really describing in your story.


I couldn't name 5 other people who do as thorough a job of speaking about software 
freedom, as consistently, and who take as many bad-faith attacks in the doing as RMS 
has for as long as he's been doing that work. Perhaps those who find such fault in 
him should take up the task of advocating for software freedom (not the 
proprietor-friendly weaker open source) so they can get a taste of the typically 
careful parsing RMS gives his questioners.



I haven't personally seen the abuse that people have reported [...]



None of which has anything to do with how well RMS discusses software freedom. Let's 
not conflate allegations of bad speech here. Speech to or about women, transsexuals, 
and saying things others don't want to read on rape (which are the main points the 
objections) is not the same as getting upset at a conference where RMS appears to 
have been set up with a mistaken (generously described) introduction. Offering this 
story here in this temporal context comes off to me as piling on more clarifying 
anything relevant to the complaints at hand.



[...] I have seen plenty of cringey moments in other talks and at LibrePlanet.


In the 2015 LibrePlanet where the FSF apparently invited Robinson Tryon to speak 
about "Document Freedo

Re: Support RMS

[Deb Nicholson]

   Well, it's disappointing but not surprising that a call for improving
   the way people are treated within the free software movement is being
   seen by some on this list as "hateful" or somehow in "opposition to
   free software." I honestly don't see how creating a haven for sexist
   behavior and disrespect can lead to the movement's growth, but maybe
   I'm mistaken in thinking that we all want that growth.
   I am grateful to those who are interested in working towards an
   inclusive and non-toxic future for the free software movement. Maybe
   I'll get to work with you all someday on one of the projects that is
   interested in growing the free software movement.
   Best,
   Deb

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:03 PM Jean Louis  wrote:

 * Deb Nicholson <[1]d...@eximiousproductions.com> [2021-03-26 16:52]:
 >An interesting thing about men who harass women is that they
 usually
 >don't do it to men. Men who let the community know that they
 "don't
 >believe in harassment" are the last people to find out it's
 happening,
 >because no one feels safe telling them.
 Generalization without end.
 Why are you sending accusations to this mailing list? How is this
 mailing list to defend your rights? Or is your only purpose to
 divide
 and bring more hate here?

References

   1. mailto:d...@eximiousproductions.com
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

"Things have been different with RMS. He has consistently stood out for

years with bad behavior."

Simply repeating that lie will not make it true.

Stop wasting everyone's time.

-t


On 2021-03-26 11:44, Florian Snow wrote:

Hi everyone,

I appreciate the calm, measured voices I've heard here.  I would also
like to take some of the heat out of this discussion and contribute my
point of view.  I usually just lurk here, not sure since when.  I've
been donating to and volunteering for different Free Software groups 
for

many years now, mainly the big ones, the FSF, the FSFE, and the SFC.
But of course I don't speak for any of them.  I am quite disheartened 
by

the current situation, because I would have liked to have seen a
different development overall. I was happy at first when I heard that
Richard Stallman was speaking at Libreplanet. I had the impression that
it might work out similarly to what happened with Linus Torvalds, who
took some time off, reflected on his behavior, and then came back with 
a

changed attitude. As far as I know that worked well, but I don't know
all the details about how it's going now.

Things have been different with RMS. He has consistently stood out for
years with bad behavior. I don't mean the things that are mentioned
again and again in certain news outlets. Those articles do often at
least lack context (although even the context does not make these
instances problem-free). But there is other problematic behavior. For
example, it harms our movement if at events about Free Software, RMS
also remarks on completely unrelated topics which offend people. And
it's unnecessary because it doesn't advance software freedom.  But even
if you ignore all that, there are still problematic things. For
instance, RMS acting annoyed and aggressive when people accidentally 
use

a wrong term. And yes, I have also personally experienced the exact
opposite, where he reacted very friendly to those mistakes, but those
things don't cancel each other out. And that behavior also scares off
people who are new to our movement, who don't know everything yet, but
are enthusiastic about the cause and want to learn. It's a problem that
they run the risk of being yelled at for making a mistake. It's also a
problem when people who help RMS with something are completely ignored
and get the impression in the interaction that they as a person don't
matter at all, it's just that he just needs an alarm clock or a pen or
whatever and nothing else matters. And you can explain some of these
behaviors to him and then sometimes something changes. But the change
usually remains very limited in scope and in similar cases the behavior
doesn't change. And yes, I have a strong urge to excuse such things,
because RMS is just so focused on the matter and maybe without a 
certain

stubbornness this whole movement would not exist. And yes, I know other
sides of him, where he is extremely kind to people and brings them
gifts. But even there, the good behavior does not cancel out the bad,
especially because it relates to different people. All of this has been
hurting us for a long time because it turns people away from our
community.

But even if you disregard all that, there are still more problems. 
Let's

assume that all of RMS's statements that other people found problematic
were just misunderstandings. Personally, if someone tells me "Hey, what
you just said upsets me" or something like that, my first reaction is
"Oh, I'm sorry about that." And then I try to avoid that in the
future. You can often say things in a less confrontational way, and you
don't always have to share every thought with every person. You can 
also

sometimes say nothing (even if it's hard - I know this from
myself). With RMS, though, the answer too often was "What I said was
right because."  or "There's no need to get upset because my assertion
is right for those reasons." That may all be true, but even when
interpreted in an extremely positive way, that is at the very least an
extremely poor communication style.

And if I repeatedly offend people with the same problematic statements,
and this is also completely unnecessary because it has nothing to do
with my mission of advancing Free Software, then at some point the
question arises as to whether these things are still compatible. If I
have such a high profile position, I have to keep some ideas to myself,
also because otherwise I harm the cause. Or if I absolutely want to say
these things, then perhaps I should give up this leadership position so
as not to harm the cause. And to arrive at this conclusion, I already
interpreted a lot of things in a very favorable way.

At some point, however, there comes a time where you have to ask
yourself whether someone who repeatedly makes statements that hurt
others isn't making these statements his own, no matter if it is meant
that way. For example (deliberately choice of something RMS is not
accused of): if someone repeatedly uses racist phrases or word

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   I don’t know you say it’s simply a lie. Here’s another testimony from
   former a SFS staff member:
   “I worked at the FSF for 3 years and volunteered for over 6 years —
   that ended in 2004. I witnessed misogyny, sexual objectification, and
   abuse carried out by RMS. I banded together with my coworkers, formed a
   union, negotiated a contract, and was elected shop steward.
   While RMS started the free software movement and the GNU GPL was a
   groundbreaking document, the community still has a right to hold him to
   account for his abhorrent actions and harmful speech. RMS should not be
   part of the FSF.
   The movement has grown larger than one person. We need leaders that are
   inclusive and treat all humans with the respect and dignity that they
   deserve. I cannot support a Free Software Foundation that enables RMS.
   During my time at the FSF, I helped create the associate membership
   program, significantly broadening the financial support base for the
   non-profit and encouraging a robust dialogue between supporters and the
   FSF. Donors have power over the FSF. Use it.”
   He then adds as a PS that the previous testimony is an accurate account
   of why staff unionized: to protect against RMS’s behavior.
   From
   [1]https://twitter.com/paulnivin/status/1374499598853545986
   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:51 AM Thomas Lord <[2]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

   "It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it. That's the
   reason."

As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.

   I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as anything
   less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM, and
   GNU. It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the
   FSF and you should, it would seem, take that option.

   -t

   On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy boundaries. I
   have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of
   community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant or
   whatever is generally a good thing.

   But as for the reason why staff organized the union — you may call it
   silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:

   " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union shop, or
   why.

   It is union to try to protect people from RMS.

   That's it. That's the reason.

   Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really informed
   my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.

   Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like berievement
   leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a position of
   power.

   I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held unchecked
   authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you could
   not tell RMS what to do.

   Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a
   written contract was the only option.

   That is just... Not normal. Right?"

   From
   [3]https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord <[4]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

   That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and support
   of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions are
   good, at least while the injustice of wage labor still exists.

   > he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the
   free software movement.

   I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory
   things said about him have supported that conclusion.

   Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
   movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders should
   not be tolerated here or anywhere.

   -t



   On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having
   organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the
   whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health
   insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.



   Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing"
   because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem
   rather than solve or eliminate it.



   However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and adds
   to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm
   to people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord <[5]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
 have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.
 -t
 On 2021-03-26 08:54, Aaron Wolf wrote:
 > I really appreciate seeing the perspective from Georgia. Thanks
 also
 > deeply to Deb Nicholson for engaging here in this space.
 Obviously,
 

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having
   organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the
   whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health
   insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.

   Forming a union and finally talking about it isn’t “whistleblowing”
   because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem
   rather than solve or eliminate it.

   However, I think we can agree that it’s compelling nonetheless and adds
   to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm
   to people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord <[1]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
 have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.
 -t
 On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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
 > [2]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
 >
 [3]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discus
 s
 ___
 libreplanet-discuss mailing list
 [4]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
 [5]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discus
 s

References

   1. mailto:l...@basiscraft.com
   2. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
   3. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
   4. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
   5. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libre

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   Confirmation bias is a heck of a drug. It feels good feel right- to
   draw conclusions, accept only supporting evidence, and reject
   everything else. Fo a year now it seems people want to frame everything
   as a matter of “character assassination” — and that is why the line
   Aaron quoted again about decades of bad conduct and dysfunction is so
   important. FSF created a union to protect staff against the whims and
   wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health insurance
   for everyone. But while confirmation bias feels good, it feels even
   better to build a free software movement with peers who believe it’s
   more than one person.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 9:54 AM Aaron Wolf <[1]wolft...@riseup.net>
   wrote:

 The reason I bothered speaking up here is because there is a trend
 toward dismissiveness. Seek ways to lump the critics in with the bad
 actors. Reject an analogy because it's not equivalent.
 Those are the methods by which we *avoid* learning all we can learn.
 If our goal is indeed to gain all the perspectives we can to be as
 wise
 as possible, we must start with the presumption that there *is*
 something to learn. Presume that the critics have some insight
 *even* if
 they are guilty of some other unfair statements. Presume that an
 analogy
 has some insight even if it's not actually equivalent.
 To learn, we can say, "*how* is this critique true?" and "what about
 this analogy is *true*?"
 To avoid learning, we can say "what aspects of the critic can we use
 to
 dismiss them?" and "in what ways is the analogy wrong?"
 A good mental model: fill in the blank: "I would accept your
 feedback if
 _" (maybe, if you were an expert, or if it were presented
 without
 some unfair attack, or if you have personal experience, or if you've
 been part of the community long enough" etc etc)
 Next, recognize that every one of those filters is an *obstacle* to
 an
 open mind. I'm not saying we should be so open-minded that our
 brains
 fall out. But we can be conscious of our filters. Every
 feedback-filter
 is a closed door. It's possible to get to say, "I will truly listen
 to
 and consider any feedback in any form from anyone and any time", but
 I'm
 not saying that's right for us or for anyone in particular. I'm just
 saying to *notice* our filters.
 Don't just look for the flaws. Ask: how is the Snowden analogy
 *useful*?
 On 2021-03-26 9:40 a.m., Yuchen Pei wrote:
 > I agree with you we should take feedback seriously, however:
 >
 >> 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.
 >
 > In the same Twitter thread, she also told people that she signed
 the
 > "open letter", which is based on hearsay and gotcha online
 statements.
 >
 >>
 >> 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 do not take a stand against character assassination, we may
 lose
 > the organisation and RMS's ability to provide insightful and
 pointed
 > perspectives.
 >
 >>
 >> 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 i

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   Ali, I’m disappointed but not surprised you came to that conclusion yet
   again. The history seems to be the opposite: FSF staff organized a
   union because RMS was causing harm and dysfunction, and at best, RMS
   went along and accepted it as a net positive state of affairs.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:00 AM Ali Reza Hayati <[1]hay...@riseup.net>
   wrote:

 So basically some people are claiming RMS helped to set up a union
 to protect people from himself and that's one reason not to support
 RMS.
 You guys are making me support him more.
 On March 26, 2021 5:51:57 PM UTC, Thomas Lord
 <[2]l...@basiscraft.com> wrote:
 >"It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it. That's
 the
 >reason."
 >
 > As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.
 >
 >I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as
 anything
 >less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM, and
 GNU.
 >It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the
 FSF
 >and you should, it would seem, take that option.
 >
 >-t
 >
 >On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 >
 >> A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy
 boundaries. I have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested,
 a set of community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor
 covenant or whatever is generally a good thing.
 >>
 >> But as for the reason why staff organized the union -- you may
 call it silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:
 >>
 >> " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union
 shop, or why.
 >>
 >> It is union to try to protect people from RMS.
 >>
 >> That's it. That's the reason.
 >>
 >> Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really
 informed my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.
 >>
 >> Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like
 berievement leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from
 a position of power.
 >>
 >> I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held
 unchecked authority. It did not matter that there was a board of
 FSF: you could not tell RMS what to do.
 >>
 >> Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a
 written contract was the only option.
 >>
 >> That is just... Not normal. Right?"
 >>
 >> From
 >> [3]https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197
 >>
 >> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord
 <[4]l...@basiscraft.com> wrote:
 >>
 >> That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and
 support of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because
 unions are good, at least while the injustice of wage labor still
 exists.
 >>
 >>> he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and
 the free software movement.
 >>
 >> I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory
 things said about him have supported that conclusion.
 >>
 >> Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
 movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders
 should not be tolerated here or anywhere.
 >>
 >> -t
 >>
 >> On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 >> Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for
 having organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves
 against the whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to
 take away health insurance for everyone or other workplace
 dysfunction.
 >>
 >> Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't
 "whistleblowing" because obviously the staff and board chose to
 contain the problem rather than solve or eliminate it.
 >>
 >> However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless
 and adds to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also
 caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the free
 software movement.
 >>
 >> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord
 <[5]l...@basiscraft.com> wrote: It's wrong to describe people as
 "whistle blowers" when they
 >> have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.
 >>
 >> -t
 >>
 >> On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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 *

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   My apologies! Please accept these two edits:

   I don’t know *why you say it’s simply a lie. Here’s another testimony
   from *another former FSF staff member:

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:55 AM Danny Spitzberg
   <[1]stationa...@gmail.com> wrote:

   I don’t know you say it’s simply a lie. Here’s another testimony from
   former a SFS staff member:
   “I worked at the FSF for 3 years and volunteered for over 6 years —
   that ended in 2004. I witnessed misogyny, sexual objectification, and
   abuse carried out by RMS. I banded together with my coworkers, formed a
   union, negotiated a contract, and was elected shop steward.
   While RMS started the free software movement and the GNU GPL was a
   groundbreaking document, the community still has a right to hold him to
   account for his abhorrent actions and harmful speech. RMS should not be
   part of the FSF.
   The movement has grown larger than one person. We need leaders that are
   inclusive and treat all humans with the respect and dignity that they
   deserve. I cannot support a Free Software Foundation that enables RMS.
   During my time at the FSF, I helped create the associate membership
   program, significantly broadening the financial support base for the
   non-profit and encouraging a robust dialogue between supporters and the
   FSF. Donors have power over the FSF. Use it.”
   He then adds as a PS that the previous testimony is an accurate account
   of why staff unionized: to protect against RMS’s behavior.
   From
   [2]https://twitter.com/paulnivin/status/1374499598853545986

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:51 AM Thomas Lord <[3]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

   "It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it. That's the
   reason."

As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.

   I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as anything
   less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM, and
   GNU. It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the
   FSF and you should, it would seem, take that option.

   -t

   On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy boundaries. I
   have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of
   community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant or
   whatever is generally a good thing.

   But as for the reason why staff organized the union — you may call it
   silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:

   " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union shop, or
   why.

   It is union to try to protect people from RMS.

   That's it. That's the reason.

   Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really informed
   my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.

   Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like berievement
   leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a position of
   power.

   I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held unchecked
   authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you could
   not tell RMS what to do.

   Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a
   written contract was the only option.

   That is just... Not normal. Right?"

   From
   [4]https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord <[5]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

   That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and support
   of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions are
   good, at least while the injustice of wage labor still exists.

   > he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the
   free software movement.

   I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory
   things said about him have supported that conclusion.

   Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
   movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders should
   not be tolerated here or anywhere.

   -t



   On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having
   organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the
   whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health
   insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.



   Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing"
   because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem
   rather than solve or eliminate it.



   However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and adds
   to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm
   to people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord <[6]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
 have not produce

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy boundaries. I
   have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of
   community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant or
   whatever is generally a good thing.
   But as for the reason why staff organized the union — you may call it
   silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:
   “ I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union shop, or
   why.
   It is union to try to protect people from RMS.
   That's it. That's the reason.
   Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really informed
   my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.
   Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like berievement
   leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a position of
   power.
   I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held unchecked
   authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you could
   not tell RMS what to do.
   Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a
   written contract was the only option.
   That is just... Not normal. Right?“
   From
   [1]https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord <[2]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

   That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and support
   of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions are
   good, at least while the injustice of wage labor still exists.

   > he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the
   free software movement.

   I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory
   things said about him have supported that conclusion.

   Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
   movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders should
   not be tolerated here or anywhere.

   -t

   On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having
   organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the
   whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health
   insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.



   Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing"
   because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem
   rather than solve or eliminate it.



   However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and adds
   to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm
   to people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord <[3]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
 have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.
 -t
 On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   If someone else organizes something and you support it, that’s great.
   That in no way means that the supporter was the leader.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:06 AM Ali Reza Hayati <[1]hay...@riseup.net>
   wrote:

 Weird.
 Danny:
 >> I have no doubt RMS was supportive.
 On March 26, 2021 6:02:52 PM UTC, Danny Spitzberg
 <[2]stationa...@gmail.com> wrote:
 >Ali, I’m disappointed but not surprised you came to that conclusion
 yet
 >again. The history seems to be the opposite: FSF staff organized a
 union
 >because RMS was causing harm and dysfunction, and at best, RMS went
 along
 >and accepted it as a net positive state of affairs.
 >
 >On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:00 AM Ali Reza Hayati
 <[3]hay...@riseup.net> wrote:
 >
 >> So basically some people are claiming RMS helped to set up a
 union to
 >> protect people from himself and that's one reason not to support
 RMS.
 >>
 >> You guys are making me support him more.
 >>
 >> On March 26, 2021 5:51:57 PM UTC, Thomas Lord
 <[4]l...@basiscraft.com> wrote:
 >> >"It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it.
 That's the
 >> >reason."
 >> >
 >> > As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.
 >> >
 >> >I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as
 anything
 >> >less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM,
 and GNU.
 >> >It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with
 the FSF
 >> >and you should, it would seem, take that option.
 >> >
 >> >-t
 >> >
 >> >On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 >> >
 >> >> A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy
 boundaries. I
 >> have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of
 community
 >> agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant or
 whatever is
 >> generally a good thing.
 >> >>
 >> >> But as for the reason why staff organized the union -- you may
 call it
 >> silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:
 >> >>
 >> >> " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union
 shop, or
 >> why.
 >> >>
 >> >> It is union to try to protect people from RMS.
 >> >>
 >> >> That's it. That's the reason.
 >> >>
 >> >> Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really
 informed
 >> my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.
 >> >>
 >> >> Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like
 berievement
 >> leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a
 position of
 >> power.
 >> >>
 >> >> I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held
 unchecked
 >> authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you
 could not
 >> tell RMS what to do.
 >> >>
 >> >> Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on
 a
 >> written contract was the only option.
 >> >>
 >> >> That is just... Not normal. Right?"
 >> >>
 >> >> From
 >> >> [5]https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197
 >> >>
 >> >> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord
 <[6]l...@basiscraft.com>
 >> wrote:
 >> >>
 >> >> That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement
 and support
 >> of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions
 are good, at
 >> least while the injustice of wage labor still exists.
 >> >>
 >> >>> he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and
 the free
 >> software movement.
 >> >>
 >> >> I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the
 derogatory
 >> things said about him have supported that conclusion.
 >> >>
 >> >> Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
 >> movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders
 should not
 >> be tolerated here or anywhere.
 >> >>
 >> >> -t
 >> >>
 >> >> On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 >> >> Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for
 having
 >> organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves
 against the
 >> whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away
 health
 >> insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.
 >> >>
 >> >> Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't
 "whistleblowing"
 >> because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the
 problem rather
 >> than solve or eliminate it.
 >> >>
 >> >> However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless
 and adds
 >> to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also
 caused harm to
 >> people and to the FSF organization and the free software

Re: RMS is back on board

[Danny Spitzberg]

   At the risk of oversimplification,...

   It is bad practice for a movement to protect people who behave badly
   and have demonstrated an unwillingness or inability to change their
   behavior — because they have made some good contributions.

   It’s ever worse practice to pretend people “well, actually” behave in
   good ways and that every single person who says otherwise can’t be
   believed because “in my experience” or “in my opinion” the person
   hasn’t seemed bad.

   Thankfully, the FSF seem open to learning:

Update on work to improve governance at the FSF

Summary of actions from the board and voting member meetings of Thursday,
March 25, 2021:

   The voting members unanimously agreed to elect a union staff member,
   selected by the FSF union staff, to be a full voting member and
   director. The first such representative will be elected as soon as the
   staff chooses one. The FSF will adopt by-law changes to implement this
   as a requirement going forward.

   The board of directors is soliciting proposals from qualified
   consultants to assist in creating a transparent, formal process for
   identifying candidates and appointing board members who are wise,
   capable, and committed to the FSF's mission. The FSF intends to rewrite
   the by-laws in a way that binds the organization to transparency in its
   choice of directors. This process will establish ways for FSF associate
   members and supporters to meaningfully contribute to the discussion.
   The board is looking for proposals to be received by Friday, April 2,
   2021. Please email [1]i...@fsf.org with the subject "Director
   Transparency Engagement" for details.

   FSF president Geoffrey Knauth announced, "I commit myself to resign as
   an FSF officer, director, and voting member as soon as there is a clear
   path for new leadership assuring continuity of the FSF’s mission and
   compliance with fiduciary requirements."

   The board of directors will continue this work at its next meeting,
   scheduled for Sunday, March 28.

   From
   [2]https://www.fsf.org/news/update-on-work-to-improve-governance-at-the
   -fsf
   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 7:53 AM Ivan J. <[3]para...@dyne.org> wrote:

 On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 09:44:32PM +0430, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:
 > I wrote this blog post:
 >
 [4]https://alirezahayati.com/2021/03/25/fight-against-idiocy-support
 -rms/
 Thank you for this, it's a fantastic read. I'd urge anyone who can
 to
 spread it.
 Best regards,
 Ivan
 ___
 libreplanet-discuss mailing list
 [5]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
 [6]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discus
 s

References

   1. mailto:i...@fsf.org
   2. https://www.fsf.org/news/update-on-work-to-improve-governance-at-the-fsf
   3. mailto:para...@dyne.org
   4. https://alirezahayati.com/2021/03/25/fight-against-idiocy-support-rms/
   5. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
   6. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   Thomas, you keep using the word “lies” to refer testimonies in this
   thread from former FSF staff.

   Do you mean to say that these people are all lying?

   Also, more importantly, are you implying that Paul and Aaron and Deb
   and every proposal for a path forward is all... bad?

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:11 AM Thomas Lord <[1]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 Yes.  Every "movement"-type organization I have ever associated with
 goes through period of time when people come and try to divide and
 conquer, drumming up false complaints, trying to impose new rules
 that
 will, gosh, give themselves power over others,  trying to discredit
 the
 most effective movement members.
 This is no different - we are just getting endless repetition of the
 same accusations that don't stand up to scrutiny.
 It is the people spreading those lies who distract us from hacking
 for
 liberation and teaching others why software freedom matters and how
 they
 can help create it.   Hopefully, after yet another of their failures
 to
 sustain a case, some of them will find the door and find something
 else
 to do.
 -t
 On 2021-03-26 11:00, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:
 > So basically some people are claiming RMS helped to set up a union
 to
 > protect people from himself and that's one reason not to support
 RMS.
 >
 > You guys are making me support him more.
 >
 > On March 26, 2021 5:51:57 PM UTC, Thomas Lord
 <[2]l...@basiscraft.com>
 > wrote:
 >> "It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it.
 That's
 >> the
 >> reason."
 >>
 >> As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.
 >>
 >> I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as
 anything
 >> less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM,
 and
 >> GNU.
 >>It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the
 FSF
 >> and you should, it would seem, take that option.
 >>
 >> -t
 >>
 >> On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 >>
 >>> A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy
 boundaries. I
 >>> have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of
 >>> community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor
 covenant
 >>> or whatever is generally a good thing.
 >>>
 >>> But as for the reason why staff organized the union -- you may
 call
 >>> it silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:
 >>>
 >>> " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union
 shop,
 >>> or why.
 >>>
 >>> It is union to try to protect people from RMS.
 >>>
 >>> That's it. That's the reason.
 >>>
 >>> Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really
 >>> informed my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't
 do.
 >>>
 >>> Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like
 >>> berievement leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS
 from a
 >>> position of power.
 >>>
 >>> I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held
 unchecked
 >>> authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you
 could
 >>> not tell RMS what to do.
 >>>
 >>> Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a
 >>> written contract was the only option.
 >>>
 >>> That is just... Not normal. Right?"
 >>>
 >>> From
 >>> [3]https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197
 >>>
 >>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord
 <[4]l...@basiscraft.com>
 >>> wrote:
 >>>
 >>> That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and
 >>> support of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because
 >>> unions are good, at least while the injustice of wage labor
 still
 >>> exists.
 >>>
  he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and
 the
  free software movement.
 >>>
 >>> I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the
 derogatory
 >>> things said about him have supported that conclusion.
 >>>
 >>> Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
 >>> movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders
 >>> should not be tolerated here or anywhere.
 >>>
 >>> -t
 >>>
 >>> On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 >>> Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for
 having
 >>> organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves
 against
 >>> the whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take
 away
 >>> health insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.
 >>>
 >>> Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't
 "whistleblowing"
   

Re: A few thoughts.

[Quiliro Ordóñez]

Thank you for sharing your comment.  Please let me add mine too.

El 2021-03-26 09:33, murph escribió:

> I walked away that day, not energized about supporting Free Software,
> but instead thinking about the man that was in the front of the room
> talking about it.  Was this the right person to further that cause?  I
> was a new member then, so I didn't really feel it was my place to
> bring this to the FSF.  I just let it go.  Perhaps I should not have.
> Maybe I should have sent an email then, and try to raise these
> concerns.

Much better service would have been contacting him.  He is not perfect
and it would have benefited him and everyone else who believes in by
freedom. The best would have been if the issue were presented then and
not as a reason to make a smaller error minimize the great help to
promote freedom that Richard Stallman has been and is.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Yuchen Pei]

I agree with you we should take feedback seriously, however:

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.


In the same Twitter thread, she also told people that she signed 
the "open letter", which is based on hearsay and gotcha online 
statements.




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 do not take a stand against character assassination, we may 
lose the organisation and RMS's ability to provide insightful and 
pointed perspectives.




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.


This is a terrible analogy. Ed Snowden was risking his life 
spearheading a fight against a powerful government body, but 
accusing a person from a safe distance while that person is being 
attacked in all directions is a different matter.




In solidarity,
Aaron Wolf
(FSF member since 2014, co-founder of Snowdrift.coop)



Again, I agree that we need all perspectives and we should value 
all feedback, including those from Deb and Georgia that are not 
based on falsehood. But I also don't think it is helpful to raise 
concerns about someone who is besieged.





___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss



--
GPG Key: 47F9 D050 1E11 8879 9040  4941 2126 7E93 EF86 DFD0


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Florian Snow]

Hi everyone,

I appreciate the calm, measured voices I've heard here.  I would also
like to take some of the heat out of this discussion and contribute my
point of view.  I usually just lurk here, not sure since when.  I've
been donating to and volunteering for different Free Software groups for
many years now, mainly the big ones, the FSF, the FSFE, and the SFC.
But of course I don't speak for any of them.  I am quite disheartened by
the current situation, because I would have liked to have seen a
different development overall. I was happy at first when I heard that
Richard Stallman was speaking at Libreplanet. I had the impression that
it might work out similarly to what happened with Linus Torvalds, who
took some time off, reflected on his behavior, and then came back with a
changed attitude. As far as I know that worked well, but I don't know
all the details about how it's going now.

Things have been different with RMS. He has consistently stood out for
years with bad behavior. I don't mean the things that are mentioned
again and again in certain news outlets. Those articles do often at
least lack context (although even the context does not make these
instances problem-free). But there is other problematic behavior. For
example, it harms our movement if at events about Free Software, RMS
also remarks on completely unrelated topics which offend people. And
it's unnecessary because it doesn't advance software freedom.  But even
if you ignore all that, there are still problematic things. For
instance, RMS acting annoyed and aggressive when people accidentally use
a wrong term. And yes, I have also personally experienced the exact
opposite, where he reacted very friendly to those mistakes, but those
things don't cancel each other out. And that behavior also scares off
people who are new to our movement, who don't know everything yet, but
are enthusiastic about the cause and want to learn. It's a problem that
they run the risk of being yelled at for making a mistake. It's also a
problem when people who help RMS with something are completely ignored
and get the impression in the interaction that they as a person don't
matter at all, it's just that he just needs an alarm clock or a pen or
whatever and nothing else matters. And you can explain some of these
behaviors to him and then sometimes something changes. But the change
usually remains very limited in scope and in similar cases the behavior
doesn't change. And yes, I have a strong urge to excuse such things,
because RMS is just so focused on the matter and maybe without a certain
stubbornness this whole movement would not exist. And yes, I know other
sides of him, where he is extremely kind to people and brings them
gifts. But even there, the good behavior does not cancel out the bad,
especially because it relates to different people. All of this has been
hurting us for a long time because it turns people away from our
community.

But even if you disregard all that, there are still more problems. Let's
assume that all of RMS's statements that other people found problematic
were just misunderstandings. Personally, if someone tells me "Hey, what
you just said upsets me" or something like that, my first reaction is
"Oh, I'm sorry about that." And then I try to avoid that in the
future. You can often say things in a less confrontational way, and you
don't always have to share every thought with every person. You can also
sometimes say nothing (even if it's hard - I know this from
myself). With RMS, though, the answer too often was "What I said was
right because."  or "There's no need to get upset because my assertion
is right for those reasons." That may all be true, but even when
interpreted in an extremely positive way, that is at the very least an
extremely poor communication style.

And if I repeatedly offend people with the same problematic statements,
and this is also completely unnecessary because it has nothing to do
with my mission of advancing Free Software, then at some point the
question arises as to whether these things are still compatible. If I
have such a high profile position, I have to keep some ideas to myself,
also because otherwise I harm the cause. Or if I absolutely want to say
these things, then perhaps I should give up this leadership position so
as not to harm the cause. And to arrive at this conclusion, I already
interpreted a lot of things in a very favorable way.

At some point, however, there comes a time where you have to ask
yourself whether someone who repeatedly makes statements that hurt
others isn't making these statements his own, no matter if it is meant
that way. For example (deliberately choice of something RMS is not
accused of): if someone repeatedly uses racist phrases or words, even
after it is pointed out to him, doesn't he at least at some point make
these racist statements his own, even if it is not meant that way?
That's exactly how it is in the case of RMS, unfortunately.

Now, as I said, this was all against

Re: Support RMS

[Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss]

On 26/03/2021 18:25, Thomas Lord wrote:

No "path forward" is needed in reaction to  people repeating the same
accusations that don't stand up to scrutiny.

Where we need paths forward is in strategic and tactical decisions
about what free software to try to bring into existence, and what can
be done to expand the mass of people who care about and work to promote
software freedom.  Those are examples of what forums like this are for.

-t



On 2021-03-26 11:15, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

Thomas, you keep using the word "lies" to refer testimonies in this
thread from former FSF staff.



Do you mean to say that these people are all lying?



Also, more importantly, are you implying that Paul and Aaron and Deb
and every proposal for a path forward is all... bad?



Part of my point was to try and suggest a policy going forward ensures 
that any accusations made in the future,  however trivial they may seem 
are investigated properly and dealt with,  it could be a simple mis 
understanding, which if explained both parties leave, hopefully happy it 
has been resolved.


Allowing complaints to go ignored or be fobbed off (I have personal 
experience of being a VICTIM of this) simply makes people more scared of 
speaking out,  think it is pointless,   leads to mis trust and quite bad 
feelings, to the point where you consider those who fobbed you off as 
ACCESSORY TO THE CRIME.


Should an employee have to give their employer an ultimatum that the 
abuse they are being subjected to stops or that person will take legal 
action under article 3 of the human rights act, that outlaws humiliating 
and degrading treatment.


The threat of that action worked for me, but I should NEVER have been 
put into that position in the first place.


Sometimes what may seem an innocent comment can be quite offensive, if 
handled properly the two parties can be brought together, to explain how 
each feels, and that generally should result in forgiveness and a better 
 understanding of each other.  Esp when it was down to a simple mis 
understanding.



Paul




OpenPGP_0x8EA91B51E27E3D99.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

   No "path forward" is needed in reaction to  people repeating the same
   accusations that don't stand up to scrutiny.

   Where we need paths forward is in strategic and tactical decisions
   about what free software to try to bring into existence, and what can
   be done to expand the mass of people who care about and work to promote
   software freedom.  Those are examples of what forums like this are for.

   -t



   On 2021-03-26 11:15, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   Thomas, you keep using the word "lies" to refer testimonies in this
   thread from former FSF staff.



   Do you mean to say that these people are all lying?



   Also, more importantly, are you implying that Paul and Aaron and Deb
   and every proposal for a path forward is all... bad?

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:11 AM Thomas Lord <[1]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 Yes.  Every "movement"-type organization I have ever associated with
 goes through period of time when people come and try to divide and
 conquer, drumming up false complaints, trying to impose new rules
 that
 will, gosh, give themselves power over others,  trying to discredit
 the
 most effective movement members.
 This is no different - we are just getting endless repetition of the
 same accusations that don't stand up to scrutiny.
 It is the people spreading those lies who distract us from hacking
 for
 liberation and teaching others why software freedom matters and how
 they
 can help create it.   Hopefully, after yet another of their failures
 to
 sustain a case, some of them will find the door and find something
 else
 to do.
 -t
 On 2021-03-26 11:00, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:
 > So basically some people are claiming RMS helped to set up a union
 to
 > protect people from himself and that's one reason not to support
 RMS.
 >
 > You guys are making me support him more.
 >
 > On March 26, 2021 5:51:57 PM UTC, Thomas Lord
 <[2]l...@basiscraft.com>
 > wrote:
 >> "It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it.
 That's
 >> the
 >> reason."
 >>
 >> As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.
 >>
 >> I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as
 anything
 >> less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM,
 and
 >> GNU.
 >>It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the
 FSF
 >> and you should, it would seem, take that option.
 >>
 >> -t
 >>
 >> On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 >>
 >>> A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy
 boundaries. I
 >>> have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of
 >>> community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor
 covenant
 >>> or whatever is generally a good thing.
 >>>
 >>> But as for the reason why staff organized the union -- you may
 call
 >>> it silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:
 >>>
 >>> " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union
 shop,
 >>> or why.
 >>>
 >>> It is union to try to protect people from RMS.
 >>>
 >>> That's it. That's the reason.
 >>>
 >>> Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really
 >>> informed my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't
 do.
 >>>
 >>> Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like
 >>> berievement leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS
 from a
 >>> position of power.
 >>>
 >>> I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held
 unchecked
 >>> authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you
 could
 >>> not tell RMS what to do.
 >>>
 >>> Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a
 >>> written contract was the only option.
 >>>
 >>> That is just... Not normal. Right?"
 >>>
 >>> From
 >>> [3]https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197
 >>>
 >>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord
 <[4]l...@basiscraft.com>
 >>> wrote:
 >>>
 >>> That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and
 >>> support of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because
 >>> unions are good, at least while the injustice of wage labor
 still
 >>> exists.
 >>>
  he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and
 the
  free software movement.
 >>>
 >>> I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the
 derogatory
 >>> things said about him have supported that conclusion.
 >>>
 >>> Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
 >>> movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders
 >>> should not be tolerated here or anywhere.
 >>>
 >>> -

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

Yes.  Every "movement"-type organization I have ever associated with 
goes through period of time when people come and try to divide and 
conquer, drumming up false complaints, trying to impose new rules that 
will, gosh, give themselves power over others,  trying to discredit the 
most effective movement members.


This is no different - we are just getting endless repetition of the 
same accusations that don't stand up to scrutiny.


It is the people spreading those lies who distract us from hacking for 
liberation and teaching others why software freedom matters and how they 
can help create it.   Hopefully, after yet another of their failures to 
sustain a case, some of them will find the door and find something else 
to do.


-t



On 2021-03-26 11:00, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:

So basically some people are claiming RMS helped to set up a union to
protect people from himself and that's one reason not to support RMS.

You guys are making me support him more.

On March 26, 2021 5:51:57 PM UTC, Thomas Lord  
wrote:
"It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it. That's 
the

reason."

As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.

I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as anything
less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM, and 
GNU.

   It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the FSF
and you should, it would seem, take that option.

-t

On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy boundaries. I 
have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of 
community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant 
or whatever is generally a good thing.


But as for the reason why staff organized the union -- you may call 
it silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:


" I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union shop, 
or why.


It is union to try to protect people from RMS.

That's it. That's the reason.

Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really 
informed my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.


Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like 
berievement leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a 
position of power.


I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held unchecked 
authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you could 
not tell RMS what to do.


Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a 
written contract was the only option.


That is just... Not normal. Right?"

From
https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord  
wrote:


That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and 
support of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because 
unions are good, at least while the injustice of wage labor still 
exists.


he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the 
free software movement.


I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory 
things said about him have supported that conclusion.


Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the 
movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders 
should not be tolerated here or anywhere.


-t

On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having 
organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against 
the whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away 
health insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.


Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing" 
because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem 
rather than solve or eliminate it.


However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and 
adds to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also 
caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the free 
software movement.


On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord  
wrote: It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they

have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.

-t

On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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

Re: Support RMS

[Ali Reza Hayati]

Weird.

Danny:
>> I have no doubt RMS was supportive.

On March 26, 2021 6:02:52 PM UTC, Danny Spitzberg  wrote:
>Ali, I’m disappointed but not surprised you came to that conclusion yet
>again. The history seems to be the opposite: FSF staff organized a union
>because RMS was causing harm and dysfunction, and at best, RMS went along
>and accepted it as a net positive state of affairs.
>
>On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:00 AM Ali Reza Hayati  wrote:
>
>> So basically some people are claiming RMS helped to set up a union to
>> protect people from himself and that's one reason not to support RMS.
>>
>> You guys are making me support him more.
>>
>> On March 26, 2021 5:51:57 PM UTC, Thomas Lord  wrote:
>> >"It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it. That's the
>> >reason."
>> >
>> > As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.
>> >
>> >I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as anything
>> >less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM, and GNU.
>> >It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the FSF
>> >and you should, it would seem, take that option.
>> >
>> >-t
>> >
>> >On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
>> >
>> >> A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy boundaries. I
>> have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of community
>> agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant or whatever is
>> generally a good thing.
>> >>
>> >> But as for the reason why staff organized the union -- you may call it
>> silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:
>> >>
>> >> " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union shop, or
>> why.
>> >>
>> >> It is union to try to protect people from RMS.
>> >>
>> >> That's it. That's the reason.
>> >>
>> >> Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really informed
>> my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.
>> >>
>> >> Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like berievement
>> leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a position of
>> power.
>> >>
>> >> I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held unchecked
>> authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you could not
>> tell RMS what to do.
>> >>
>> >> Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a
>> written contract was the only option.
>> >>
>> >> That is just... Not normal. Right?"
>> >>
>> >> From
>> >> https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and support
>> of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions are good, at
>> least while the injustice of wage labor still exists.
>> >>
>> >>> he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the free
>> software movement.
>> >>
>> >> I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory
>> things said about him have supported that conclusion.
>> >>
>> >> Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
>> movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders should not
>> be tolerated here or anywhere.
>> >>
>> >> -t
>> >>
>> >> On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
>> >> Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having
>> organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the
>> whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health
>> insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.
>> >>
>> >> Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing"
>> because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem rather
>> than solve or eliminate it.
>> >>
>> >> However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and adds
>> to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm to
>> people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord 
>> wrote: It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
>> >> have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.
>> >>
>> >> -t
>> >>
>> >> On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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 

Re: Support RMS

[Ali Reza Hayati]

So basically some people are claiming RMS helped to set up a union to protect 
people from himself and that's one reason not to support RMS.

You guys are making me support him more.

On March 26, 2021 5:51:57 PM UTC, Thomas Lord  wrote:
>"It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it. That's the
>reason." 
>
> As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.   
>
>I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as anything
>less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM, and GNU.
>It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the FSF
>and you should, it would seem, take that option. 
>
>-t 
>
>On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
>
>> A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy boundaries. I have no 
>> doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of community agreements 
>> or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant or whatever is generally a 
>> good thing. 
>> 
>> But as for the reason why staff organized the union -- you may call it 
>> silly, but here is the testimony in their own words: 
>> 
>> " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union shop, or why. 
>> 
>> It is union to try to protect people from RMS. 
>> 
>> That's it. That's the reason. 
>> 
>> Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really informed my 
>> own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do. 
>> 
>> Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like berievement 
>> leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a position of power. 
>> 
>> I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held unchecked 
>> authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you could not 
>> tell RMS what to do. 
>> 
>> Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a written 
>> contract was the only option. 
>> 
>> That is just... Not normal. Right?" 
>> 
>> From  
>> https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197 
>> 
>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord  wrote: 
>> 
>> That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and support of 
>> the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions are good, at 
>> least while the injustice of wage labor still exists. 
>> 
>>> he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the free 
>>> software movement. 
>> 
>> I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory things 
>> said about him have supported that conclusion. 
>> 
>> Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the movement, but 
>> pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders should not be tolerated 
>> here or anywhere. 
>> 
>> -t 
>> 
>> On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote: 
>> Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having 
>> organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the 
>> whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health 
>> insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction. 
>> 
>> Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing" because 
>> obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem rather than solve 
>> or eliminate it.  
>> 
>> However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and adds to 
>> the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm to 
>> people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.  
>> 
>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord  wrote: 
>> It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
>> have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.
>> 
>> -t
>> 
>> On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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 

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

   "It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it. That's the
   reason."



As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.

   I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as anything
   less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM, and
   GNU. It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the
   FSF and you should, it would seem, take that option.

   -t

   On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy boundaries. I
   have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of
   community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant or
   whatever is generally a good thing.

   But as for the reason why staff organized the union — you may call it
   silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:

   " I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union shop, or
   why.

   It is union to try to protect people from RMS.

   That's it. That's the reason.

   Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really informed
   my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.

   Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like berievement
   leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a position of
   power.

   I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held unchecked
   authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you could
   not tell RMS what to do.

   Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a
   written contract was the only option.

   That is just... Not normal. Right?"

   From
   [1]https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord <[2]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

   That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and support
   of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions are
   good, at least while the injustice of wage labor still exists.

   > he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the
   free software movement.

   I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory
   things said about him have supported that conclusion.

   Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
   movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders should
   not be tolerated here or anywhere.

   -t



   On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having
   organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the
   whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health
   insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.



   Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing"
   because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem
   rather than solve or eliminate it.



   However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and adds
   to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm
   to people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord <[3]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
 have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.
 -t
 On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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 h

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

   That's silly.  The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and support
   of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions are
   good, at least while the injustice of wage labor still exists.

   > he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the
   free software movement.



   I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory
   things said about him have supported that conclusion.

   Once again,  you are free not to associate with the FSF or the
   movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders should
   not be tolerated here or anywhere.

   -t

   On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:

   Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having
   organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the
   whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health
   insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.



   Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing"
   because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem
   rather than solve or eliminate it.



   However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and adds
   to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm
   to people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord <[1]l...@basiscraft.com>
   wrote:

 It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
 have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.
 -t
 On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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
 > [2]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.or

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

"What we need to do, is have very robust standards of how people 
behave,  drawn up by and for the community,"


The only "problem" you seem to have a solution for is the one of a few 
people making fairly ridiculous accusations and complaints.  Your 
solution is apparently to put them in charge of a much more 
authoritarian organization.


Can we get back to hacking for liberation, please.  This has become 
tedious and absurd.  Neither the FSF nor the people who support it are 
here to coddle people making unreasonable demands on society at large.


-t


On 2021-03-26 10:05, Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss wrote:

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 t

Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord]

It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they
have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.

-t


On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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


___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss]

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.



Just a few thoughts

Hope it helps

Paul



--
Paul Sutton, Cert Cont Sci (Open)
https://personaljournal.ca/paulsutton/
OpenPGP : 4350 91C4 C8FB 681B 23A6 7944 8EA9 1B51 E27E 3D99

LibrePlanet 2021 - March 20th & 21st - https://libreplanet.org/2021/

Pronoun : him/his/he


OpenPGP_0x8EA91B51E27E3D99.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


OpenPGP_signature
Description: 

Re: Support RMS

[Aaron Wolf]

The reason I bothered speaking up here is because there is a trend
toward dismissiveness. Seek ways to lump the critics in with the bad
actors. Reject an analogy because it's not equivalent.

Those are the methods by which we *avoid* learning all we can learn.

If our goal is indeed to gain all the perspectives we can to be as wise
as possible, we must start with the presumption that there *is*
something to learn. Presume that the critics have some insight *even* if
they are guilty of some other unfair statements. Presume that an analogy
has some insight even if it's not actually equivalent.

To learn, we can say, "*how* is this critique true?" and "what about
this analogy is *true*?"

To avoid learning, we can say "what aspects of the critic can we use to
dismiss them?" and "in what ways is the analogy wrong?"

A good mental model: fill in the blank: "I would accept your feedback if
_" (maybe, if you were an expert, or if it were presented without
some unfair attack, or if you have personal experience, or if you've
been part of the community long enough" etc etc)

Next, recognize that every one of those filters is an *obstacle* to an
open mind. I'm not saying we should be so open-minded that our brains
fall out. But we can be conscious of our filters. Every feedback-filter
is a closed door. It's possible to get to say, "I will truly listen to
and consider any feedback in any form from anyone and any time", but I'm
not saying that's right for us or for anyone in particular. I'm just
saying to *notice* our filters.

Don't just look for the flaws. Ask: how is the Snowden analogy *useful*?

On 2021-03-26 9:40 a.m., Yuchen Pei wrote:
> I agree with you we should take feedback seriously, however:
> 
>> 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.
> 
> In the same Twitter thread, she also told people that she signed the
> "open letter", which is based on hearsay and gotcha online statements.
> 
>>
>> 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 do not take a stand against character assassination, we may lose
> the organisation and RMS's ability to provide insightful and pointed
> perspectives.
> 
>>
>> 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.
> 
> This is a terrible analogy. Ed Snowden was risking his life spearheading
> a fight against a powerful government body, but accusing a person from a
> safe distance while that person is being attacked in all directions is a
> different matter.
> 
>>
>> In solidarity,
>> Aaron Wolf
>> (FSF member since 2014, co-founder of Snowdrift.coop)
>>
> 
> Again, I agree that we need all perspectives and we should value all
> feedback, including those from Deb and Georgia that are not based on
> falsehood. But I also don't think it is helpful to raise concerns about
> someone who is besieged.
> 
>>
>>
>> ___
>> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
> 
> 

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-d

Re: Support RMS

[Aaron Wolf]

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

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   I am having a difficult time right now. This person Georgia shares
   several years of experience working at FSF and directly with RMS. Ali,
   their testimony makes me think that maybe the free software movement
   needs to move beyond RMS. Here are their words, copied from
   [1]https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1374504389155508232:
   “I worked at the FSF from 2015-2018 & was shop steward for a while. I
   recall having a months (MONTHS) long conversation with ED John Sullivan
   about why racist & sexist 'hacker humor' from the 90s needed to be
   removed from [2]gnu.org. rms didn't get why it was harmful.
   Also the abortion joke ('contributed' by rms) in a technical manual? He
   threw a fit when it was removed, & the energy many people (who
   respected him!!) put in to attempting to educate him in why that wasn't
   cool.
   The thing that randos who have never had to actually work with rms
   don't understand is that MANY people who deeply respected him tried to
   help him learn to not objectify women, shout over others at Libreplanet
   as if it was his birthday party, stop shit like 'emacs virgins'
   Meanwhile that energy, utterly wasted, could've been spent advocating
   for free to software and building the inclusive, impractical community
   so many people WANT. Spent, instead, on a man's ego, over and over.
   This whole thing is incredibly depressing. The free software community
   is largely full of interesting, rad people - I got to work with a bunch
   of people I like & respect & feel inspired by, organizing Libreplanet
   was my job & introduced me to amazing people from across the world
   free software has the ability to do so much good, but there's an ugly
   cult of personality around rms, & the fact that he faced consequences
   for his creepy Epdtein-adjacent comments and not the decades of shitty
   behavior towards women is infuriating & excuses his return
   It's easy for people to dismiss shitty words, & because we don't focus
   on shitty actions (& actions are easily dismissed by assholes
   sealioning for 'evidence' - bc "I saw it/experienced it" is NEVER
   enough) it's possible for a floundering FSF to 'uncancel' rms now.
   DON'T LET THEM
   My github account was, uh, dusty, to say the least, but I made a pull
   request in order to sign on to this letter.
   [3]https://rms-open-letter.github.io/
   One final thing: do not shit on FSF staff about this. They didn't ask
   for this, they weren't notified in advance of rms' apparently impromptu
   announcement, they labor for the organization and for the community
   every day. Put pressure on the board and the executive director.”
   The letter is signed by 40 organizations and over 500 individuals,
   including dozens of former FSF staff and board members.
   On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 6:04 PM Ali Reza Hayati <[4]hay...@riseup.net>
   wrote:

 Recently, RMS announced that he's back on FSF board of directors.
 Now,
 some organizations and people are attacking FSF and RMS and are
 asking
 them to resign.
 Since the accusations are false, we're asking FSF to resist this
 pressure and continue work for the good of the software libre
 movement.
 Sending message to [5]i...@fsf.org is a way of showing your support.
 They
 are acting like mobs and bullies, we should not step down from our
 principals, which are fighting for justice and truth.
 On 26/03/2021 04:49, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 > I’m not clear on why I should send a message of support for RMS.
 >
 > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:57 PM Ali Reza Hayati
 <[6]hay...@riseup.net
 > > wrote:
 >
 > People,
 >
 > FSF board has received lots of messages today and there's no
 need to
 > add
 > to the pile. Please send your support for RMS to
 [8]i...@fsf.org
 >  and ask
 > them to resist pressures and stay with us.
 >
 > Software libre is a matter of justice. If we can learn one
 thing from
 > the whole movement is to keep our principals and fight for
 justice. FSF
 > made a mistake back in 2019 and that was not to defend RMS
 against
 > false
 > accusations. Today, we can make that right by supporting a
 wonderful
 > honorable man.
 >
 > Show your support by sending messages to [10]i...@fsf.org
 > . Do it now, later
 > may be late.
 >
 > Best.
 > --
 > Ali Reza Hayati ([12]https://alirezahayati.com
 <[13]https://alirezahayati.com>)
 > Libre culture activist and privacy advocate
 > PGP: B7DC C419 C0ED 05D5 6535 1BD3 2A7F A925 75A3 C354
 >
 > ___
 > libreplanet-discuss mailing list
 > [14]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
 > 

Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg]

   I’m not clear on why I should send a message of support for RMS.

   On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:57 PM Ali Reza Hayati <[1]hay...@riseup.net>
   wrote:

 People,
 FSF board has received lots of messages today and there's no need to
 add
 to the pile. Please send your support for RMS to [2]i...@fsf.org and
 ask
 them to resist pressures and stay with us.
 Software libre is a matter of justice. If we can learn one thing
 from
 the whole movement is to keep our principals and fight for justice.
 FSF
 made a mistake back in 2019 and that was not to defend RMS against
 false
 accusations. Today, we can make that right by supporting a wonderful
 honorable man.
 Show your support by sending messages to [3]i...@fsf.org. Do it now,
 later
 may be late.
 Best.
 --
 Ali Reza Hayati ([4]https://alirezahayati.com)
 Libre culture activist and privacy advocate
 PGP: B7DC C419 C0ED 05D5 6535 1BD3 2A7F A925 75A3 C354
 ___
 libreplanet-discuss mailing list
 [5]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
 [6]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discus
 s

References

   1. mailto:hay...@riseup.net
   2. mailto:i...@fsf.org
   3. mailto:i...@fsf.org
   4. https://alirezahayati.com/
   5. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
   6. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

“Free Software”: An idea whose time has passed?

[Danny Spitzberg]

   Interesting perspective, worth engaging with. It covers everything from
   the term free/libre and beer, to Microsoft and IEC 62304, to not
   getting credit and reactionary attitudes.



“Free Software”: An idea whose time has passed

   [1]Robert M. Lefkowitz

   Almost forty years ago, in 1985, the idea of “Free Software” was born.
   That is not to say that the idea of sharing software with colleagues
   and making source code available was born. Ten years before the GNU
   Manifesto and the Free Software Foundation, I worked at a cloud
   services company (only we called it “timesharing” back then), and in
   order to encourage people to use our offerings and pay us for renting
   computer time and disk space and network bandwidth, we curated a
   collection of software libraries that customers could freely use. We
   called it the Public Library, of course. The software therein
   was public software. The idea of public software was software that
   anybody could freely use. What happened in 1985 was the birth of the
   idea that creation of software was a political act. And that when the
   creation of software was motivated by politics, it should be
   called free software to differentiate it from software created for
   other reasons. This became clear to be when I attended my first
   O’Reilly Open Source Conference, where I watched Miguel de Icaza debate
   Richard Stallman — and the question on the table was whether or not
   there was a difference between “free software” and “open source
   software”. The conclusion was that there was no detectable difference
   from examining the software or the license or any artifact. The
   difference was the intent of the programmer. If the intent was
   political (i.e. a concern for freedom), then the result was free
   software. If the intent was industrial, the result was open source
   software. I use the term industrial because the motivation of the open
   source crowd is to use what they believe to be a superior method of
   producing software.

   My interest in free or open source software has never been either
   political or industrial. My interest has always been educational. That
   is, access to the source code provided the opportunity to learn from
   it. So, in the same spirit as the Open Source / Free Software
   distinction, I coined the term Liberal Software to refer to software
   where the intent of the programmer is educational(liberal as in
   education). Any one of these three intents can produce software for
   which the source code is available — and that is often called FLOSS,
   meaning Free, Liberal, or Open Source Software.

   I prefer to think about these categories in terms of intent, because
   that opens the door to reflecting about effective strategies to
   implement that intent. So, for example, if it were to turn out that,
   all other things being equal, providing source code for libraries could
   be shown to produce software of inferior quality (and there is much
   evidence to support such a conclusion), then someone with an intent to
   produce industrial software might choose to pursue a course of action
   that did not involve making the source code available. The availability
   of source code is certainly invaluable in Liberal Software, and there
   are several scenarios regarding industrial software that require access
   to the source code. But that is a discussion for a different time.

   Today’s topic is political software. I think it is clear that the Free
   Software Foundation has failed to move the needle on the political
   issues relating to software. Those of us who are interested in issues
   of freedom and ethics and social justice related to software must
   explore alternative stratagems to achieve those objectives. The tactics
   of the Free Software Foundation (the insistence on copylefting software
   and fighting software patents) have become more and more ineffective.
   The world of software has evolved and changed in the years since 1985:
   we need to let the past die and build a better future.

   The first sign that free software is intellectually bankrupt is that
   the Free Software Foundation seems unable to develop new generations of
   leadership. Free societies are usually lukewarm to the practice of
   “dictators for life”. After around a decade, it is a healthy sign if
   new leadership emerges. It is a sign of growth and innovation. It is
   healthy. Seeing the same people in the same places pursuing the same
   failed tactics decade after decade is evidence of a lack of broader
   acceptance.

   Secondly, I am reminded of Harry Truman’s quote:

   It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the
   credit.

   The Free Software Foundation is famously fixated on insisting that it
   be given credit for Linux. Caring about who gets the credit more than
   successfully creating change is not a good look. It is, of course,
   consistent with the ego re

Re: Support RMS

[Ali Reza Hayati]

The statement (open letter) is based on lies, yes.

Do people who accuse RMS of assault are lying? I don't know that but since 
there's no evidence/proof, I just can't believe them.

I've seen various people even convicted of assault and then proven to be 
innocent so I refuse to accept anything unless there's proof. For thousands of 
years, people believed the earth is flat. Now we know it's a globe. I learnt 
that even if the whole world says something, unless there's proof, that's 
worthless.

The moment there's proof that RMS is a sexist misogynist, I'll step down from 
defending him. Till then, as long as it's only feelings, I only can have 
empathy. I seriously feel sorry that people's feelings are hurt but I can't 
accept pressure to make someone resign because some people are hurt. For me, 
using RMS' experience and thoughts to make the movement go forward and bring 
justice to computer users is far more important.

On March 26, 2021 1:47:37 AM UTC, Steve M Bibayoff  wrote:
>Hello,
>
>On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 6:05 PM Ali Reza Hayati  wrote:
>
>> Since the accusations are false, we're asking FSF to resist this
>> pressure and continue work for the good of the software libre movement.
>
>Why do you keep saying the "accusations are false"? There have been
>dozens (hundreds?) of accounts? Are you saying they are all lies?
>
>Steve
>
>___
>libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
-- 
Ali Reza Hayati (https://alirezahayati.com)
Libre culture activist and privacy advocate
PGP: B7DC C419 C0ED 05D5 6535 1BD3 2A7F A925 75A3

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: RMS is back on board

[Ivan J.]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 09:44:32PM +0430, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:
> I wrote this blog post:
> https://alirezahayati.com/2021/03/25/fight-against-idiocy-support-rms/

Thank you for this, it's a fantastic read. I'd urge anyone who can to
spread it.

Best regards,
Ivan

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 131, Issue 18 Re: RMS is back on board

[Jan Kubát]

f.org when I
>>>>> received
>>>>> your message. I'll be sending it today, and wish to encourage others
>>>>> to
>>>>> email messages of support too - asap!
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, please don't forget that Alexandre Oliva has been axed on
>>>>> account of
>>>>> canvassing support for RMS' reinstatement. RMS will need support
>>>>> from
>>>>> his
>>>>> allies on the Board. Let's address that too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Adrienne
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>>>> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>>>> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
>
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 04:27:12 +0430
> From: Ali Reza Hayati 
> To: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> Subject: Re: Support RMS
> Message-ID: <4ad6ede2-47dc-c24d-83cd-80d078a6f...@riseup.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> People,
>
> FSF board has received lots of messages today and there's no need to add
> to the pile. Please send your support for RMS to i...@fsf.org and ask
> them to resist pressures and stay with us.
>
> Software libre is a matter of justice. If we can learn one thing from
> the whole movement is to keep our principals and fight for justice. FSF
> made a mistake back in 2019 and that was not to defend RMS against false
> accusations. Today, we can make that right by supporting a wonderful
> honorable man.
>
> Show your support by sending messages to i...@fsf.org. Do it now, later
> may be late.
>
> Best.
> --
> Ali Reza Hayati (https://alirezahayati.com)
> Libre culture activist and privacy advocate
> PGP: B7DC C419 C0ED 05D5 6535 1BD3 2A7F A925 75A3 C354
>
> -- next part --
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: OpenPGP_signature
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 840 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> URL:
> <https://lists.libreplanet.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/attachments/20210326/5c4a2441/attachment.sig>
>
> --
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 19:14:02 -0500
> From: "J.B. Nicholson" 
> To: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> Subject: Meaning of "damning the [Electronic Frontier Foundation]
>   organization in absolute terms"?
> Message-ID: <1758e886-df7c-489c-01b3-f379072ff...@forestfield.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Thomas Lord wrote:
>> Having been personally close enough to see how some of the EFF founders
>> thought, I
>> will remain comfortable damning the organization in absolute terms.
>> Nothing in
>> their history of advocacy has changed my mind.  Obviously other people
>> without
>> that direct experience might not have the same sense that blanket
>> condemnation of
>> EFF is well earned, and that's fine.
>
> I don't understand what you're referring to. What, specifically, are you
> referring to?
>
>
>
> --
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> ___
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
>
>
> --
>
> End of libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 131, Issue 18
> 
>

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 131, Issue 17 Re: RMS is back on board

[Jan Kubát]

>> Re: RMS is back on board

Hi,
I recall there has been some reason to avoid Github, but discussing
the support of RMS being back on board, I thought of sharing a link

https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

in case you are not aware of it yet. I consider mailing FSF a better
option, yet I was happy to see some activity in favour of RMS and FSF
after spending a rahter unproducitve evening trying to get some input
to remind me what the negative reaction from EFF and some individuals
on Twitter was all about. I guess

https://www.fsf.org/news/preliminary-board-statement-on-fsf-governance

might be a reaction to that fuss possibly, but I consider transparency
a good thing, generally speaking. I hope they are not going to mess
that up.

Happy hacking ;)

Jan


On 3/25/21, libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
 wrote:
> Send libreplanet-discuss mailing list submissions to
>   libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   libreplanet-discuss-requ...@libreplanet.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   libreplanet-discuss-ow...@libreplanet.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of libreplanet-discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>1. Re: Today: LilyPond Workshop shortly after LibrePlanet
>   workshop planned. (Tobias Platen)
>2. Re: RMS is back on board (Ali Reza Hayati)
>3. Re: RMS is back on board (Adrienne G. Thompson)
>4. Non-functional/non-practical data/works (was: Re: RMS is back
>   on board) (Adonay Felipe Nogueira)
>5. Re: RMS is back on board (Ali Reza Hayati)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 18:14:56 +0100
> From: Tobias Platen 
> To: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> Subject: Re: Today: LilyPond Workshop shortly after LibrePlanet
>   workshop planned.
> Message-ID: <20210325181456.0e5dc9a09e5c9da76d3c9...@posteo.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 08:44:47 +0100
> Robert  wrote:
>
>> would there still be a place available?
> yes, 8 places available
>
> --
> Tobias Platen 
>
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 21:01:27 +
> From: Ali Reza Hayati 
> To: Dennis Payne ,
>   libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> Subject: Re: RMS is back on board
> Message-ID: 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> As I said, there's no "proof". A story, even if the whole world tells it,
> doesn't matter unless there's proof.
>
> On March 25, 2021 8:39:16 PM UTC, Dennis Payne 
> wrote:
>>On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 21:44 +0430, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:
>>> I wrote this blog post:
>>> https://alirezahayati.com/2021/03/25/fight-against-idiocy-support-rms/
>>>
>>> Please send your support of RMS to i...@fsf.org. This would be much
>>> appreciated.
>>
>>I don't think RMS should be "cancelled". If FSF want him on the board
>>that's fine with me. However, you include:
>>
>>"Some also accuse Stallman of sexual harassment and “assault” which
>>there’s no proof of and as a person who knows him, I can tell very far
>>from truth."
>>
>>There are enough stories that I find it implausible that there haven't
>>been bad encounters in the past between Stallman and others. Maybe he
>>didn't realize he treated someone badly. Maybe he has since learned and
>>treats people better. I don't know. I remember an actor commenting on a
>>late show that there wouldn't be a "me too" moment highlighting his bad
>>behavior but acknowledged in the past he might have been dismissive to
>>a woman in a meeting or something. We are all human and anyone can make
>>a mistake.
>>
>>Even without those stories, I find RMS flawed in his treatment of
>>games. He is accepting of non-free artwork and other content as long as
>>it is not code. I understand his reasoning that is the artistic vision
>>of the creator. I just don't agree. If you want to add a new feature to
>>the game which requires some new sprites, you would be required to redo
>>all the content or perhaps make the new sprites clash in style so as to
>>not infringe on the copyright of the original art. Even something as
>>simple as tweaking a pause screen to add some information may require
>>altering some graphics. A free game with non-free content effectively
>>makes it non-free because some changes cannot be reasonably made.
>>
>>
>
> --
> Ali Reza Hayati (https://alirezahayati.com)
> Libre culture activist and privacy advocate
> PGP: B7DC C419 C0ED 05D5 6535 1BD3 2A7F A925 75A3
> -- next part --
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 854 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL:
> 

Re: Support RMS

[Yuchen Pei]

It is one thing to raise legitimate concerns in a legitimate way, 
but a different matter to support a campaign based on blatent lies 
and mischaracterisations, that stifles discussions (as the "open 
letter" does not allow any constructive criticism) and aims at 
character assassination.


Deb Nicholson  writes:


Hi,
I'm a former FSF staff person and a former GNU maintainer who 
has left most
of the FSF & GNU mailing lists that I was on because of the 
extremely
toxic, harassment-filled environments on those lists. I stayed 
on the
LibrePlanet list because it's usually ok and I appreciate seeing 
the
occasional campaign messages and actions to take in support of 
free

software.

RMS inspires a toxic, sexist and unrepentant culture. I'm one of 
the people
who has asked him -- many times -- to take a strong stance 
against sexism
in GNU, to stop treating women as second-class citizens, and to 
re-consider
his utterly clueless and disrespectful treatment of transgender 
people in

our communities.

I want free software to win. I want everyone to be able to 
choose free
software for everything. There is no way for free software to 
win if
hundreds of previously interested people are leaving after they 
get sick of
the hateful, sexist and intolerant parts of our 
communities. People take
their cue from RMS and he has demonstrated over and over again 
that he is
not interested in removing intolerance. If we want a movement 
that grows,
instead of a quirky and toxic private club, then RMS shouldn't 
lead.


Sincerely,
Deb Nicholson

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:31 AM Ali Reza Hayati 
 wrote:



Hello Danny.

I'm sorry that your feelings are hurt but I don't see anything 
wrong
here. Dark humor is everywhere and many people like it. I've 
seen gay
people liking dark humor about gays for example. As I said, 
after all,

that's just jokes and humor.

About being offended, again that's not a problem with 
RMS. Maybe he
hasn't be nice to you or people you know but if you want a nice 
person
to lead a foundation, you may need a kid, not a grown up 
person. Every
person may upset you or others in some way. I've upset many 
people in my

life without any intention, to that I apologize to them.

If you believe RMS is not a good person, that's your opinion 
and
respectable. If you don't think RMS is a good leader, that's 
again

respectable and may even be a fair point if presented well.

However, that's not where RMS opposers stand today. What you've 
signed
is based on false accusations and lies. When it comes to 
defending

truth, that statement/letter is completely false.

I still urge people to support RMS in this matter because 
defending

truth is important.

Again, I'm sorry that your feelings have been hurt but that's 
just your

personal conflict/disappointment.

On 26/03/2021 09:06, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
> I am having a difficult time right now. This person Georgia 
> shares
> several years of experience working at FSF and directly with 
> RMS. Ali,
> their testimony makes me think that maybe the free software 
> movement

> needs to move beyond RMS. Here are their words, copied from
> https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1374504389155508232
> :
> “I worked at the FSF from 2015-2018 & was shop steward for a 
> while. I
> recall having a months (MONTHS) long conversation with ED 
> John Sullivan
> about why racist & sexist 'hacker humor' from the 90s needed 
> to be
> removed from gnu.org . rms didn't get why it 
> was

harmful.
>
> Also the abortion joke ('contributed' by rms) in a technical 
> manual? He
> threw a fit when it was removed, & the energy many people 
> (who respected
> him!!) put in to attempting to educate him in why that wasn't 
> cool.

>
> The thing that randos who have never had to actually work 
> with rms don't
> understand is that MANY people who deeply respected him tried 
> to help
> him learn to not objectify women, shout over others at 
> Libreplanet as if

> it was his birthday party, stop shit like 'emacs virgins'
>
> Meanwhile that energy, utterly wasted, could've been spent 
> advocating
> for free to software and building the inclusive, impractical 
> community
> so many people WANT. Spent, instead, on a man's ego, over and 
> over.

>
> This whole thing is incredibly depressing. The free software 
> community
> is largely full of interesting, rad people - I got to work 
> with a bunch
> of people I like & respect & feel inspired by, organizing 
> Libreplanet
> was my job & introduced me to amazing people from across the 
> world

>
> free software has the ability to do so much good, but there's 
> an ugly
> cult of personality around rms, & the fact that he faced 
> consequences
> for his creepy Epdtein-adjacent comments and not the decades 
> of shitty

> behavior towards women is infuriating & excuses his return
>
> It's easy for people to dismiss shitty words, & because we 
> don't focus
> on shitty

Re: RMS is back on board

[github . com]

* Adrienne G. Thompson  [2021-03-26 00:43]:
>I was in the process of drafting an email to [2]i...@fsf.org when I
>received your message. I'll be sending it today, and wish to encourage
>others to email messages of support too - asap!
>Also, please don't forget that Alexandre Oliva has been axed on account
>of canvassing support for RMS' reinstatement. RMS will need support
>from his allies on the Board. Let's address that too.

We shall learn out of those events and stop axing or terminating
people for reasons of their private opinions. 

One has to look upon people's merits and their support of social
causes.

I have learned this in family. I have supported my family members for
how they behave towards family, not for what they think and
talk. Deeds matters.

In relation to thinking, speech, if I am not directly participating in
the conversation I may not even know what exactly other person
meant. It is very easy to take few words out of the context especially
if I am inclined to do so. Being fair and just in communication is a
skill or better blessing.


___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: RMS is back on board

[Jean Louis]

* Ali Reza Hayati  [2021-03-26 00:03]:
> As I said, there's no "proof". A story, even if the whole world
> tells it, doesn't matter unless there's proof.

It does not matter for people with integrity, as such would not accuse
without evidences. That is why we have courts, justice systems. They
are far from perfect but better than middle age, at least in those
countries considered as developed countries.

Problem is that we have society where one person can incite hate
mongering with thousand others by using only what? Words. They enjoy
the freedom of speech to pervert true meanings and incite bullying.



___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: RMS is back on board

[Dennis Payne]

On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 21:44 +0430, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:
> I wrote this blog post: 
> https://alirezahayati.com/2021/03/25/fight-against-idiocy-support-rms/
> 
> Please send your support of RMS to i...@fsf.org. This would be much 
> appreciated.

I don't think RMS should be "cancelled". If FSF want him on the board
that's fine with me. However, you include:

"Some also accuse Stallman of sexual harassment and “assault” which
there’s no proof of and as a person who knows him, I can tell very far
from truth."

There are enough stories that I find it implausible that there haven't
been bad encounters in the past between Stallman and others. Maybe he
didn't realize he treated someone badly. Maybe he has since learned and
treats people better. I don't know. I remember an actor commenting on a
late show that there wouldn't be a "me too" moment highlighting his bad
behavior but acknowledged in the past he might have been dismissive to
a woman in a meeting or something. We are all human and anyone can make
a mistake.

Even without those stories, I find RMS flawed in his treatment of
games. He is accepting of non-free artwork and other content as long as
it is not code. I understand his reasoning that is the artistic vision
of the creator. I just don't agree. If you want to add a new feature to
the game which requires some new sprites, you would be required to redo
all the content or perhaps make the new sprites clash in style so as to
not infringe on the copyright of the original art. Even something as
simple as tweaking a pause screen to add some information may require
altering some graphics. A free game with non-free content effectively
makes it non-free because some changes cannot be reasonably made.


-- 
Dennis Payne
du...@identicalsoftware.com
https://social.freegamedev.net/channel/dulsi


___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: RMS is back on board

[Jean Louis]

Who is on Github:
https://github.com/gnusupport/rms-support-letter.github.io

Fork the repository, then in your forked repository you will find a
link and instructions how to create the yaml file with your name and
link, open up pull request to include your signature there.

Jean

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Jean Louis]

* Adrienne G. Thompson  [2021-03-26 06:31]:
>Just found an open letter in support of RMS:
>[1]https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Such things should not be on Github as they add to the conflict that
is beyond purpose of Github. Once Github removes the hate mongering,
they may as well remove this letter.

At least this letter is more transparent, they have linked it to
usernames.

However, all those games are not forwarding the cause of the FSF. 

It would be better to express support is sending support to FSF or
paying some dollars or promoting donations to FSF, or installing GNU
on formerly proprietary OS computers.



___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: RMS is back on board

[Jean Louis]

* Thomas Lord  [2021-03-26 02:21]:
> Having been personally close enough to see how some of the EFF founders
> thought, I will remain comfortable damning the organization in absolute
> terms.  Nothing in their history of advocacy has changed my mind.  Obviously
> other people without that direct experience might not have the same sense
> that blanket condemnation of EFF is well earned, and that's fine.

Let us just not make a mistake like they, EFF did, and judge the
organization by their individual members, or judge their individual
members by who they are or what they think instead by their merits and
deeds.

Th eorganization itself has its purposes, while individual members are
there to support those purposes, they may politically inclined to do
something else than what is purpose of organization. At that point of
time other members are free to express their opinions and report
incidents to say if such event should be corrected and why -- as it
should be aligned with purposes, which are written in the Memorandum
of Incorporation and By-Laws and Resolutions of a corporations.

To publish a page where they are inclined to assume political
direction not related to the purpose of the EFF is obviously
corruption. This may be incited by just one individual, and that one
alone may not be aware that he/she deviates from purposes of
organization. Reporting, communicating, handles things.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: RMS is back on board

[Jean Louis]

* Ali Reza Hayati  [2021-03-26 02:17]:
> Yes. I've seen this. EFF does a wonderful job but they're not
> defending software libre movement, at least in this matter.

That is definitely immoral from organizational viewpoint, they lobby
now who is to be on board of other organization. EFF is thus corrupted
internally as it uses its funds for issues beyond their purposes.

Express your resentments by writing to i...@eff.org

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: RMS is back on board

[Jean Louis]

* Danny Spitzberg  [2021-03-25 19:52]:
>And then Kat Walsh resigned from the board:
> 
>I am announcing my resignation from the FSF board. (Effective end of
>Thursday, for administrative reasons.) It's a decision that has been a
>long time coming for me, but still a hard one: I think the work of the
>FSF is important, and broken things are the most important to
>fix.

Knowing corporate laws, that is just common action, every board member
can express their wishes and conduct actions, resign, etc. Is it
expected to be spectacular?

We don't know how missing staff or board member is impacting the FSF,
but I hope they will find proper replacement.

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Steve M Bibayoff]

Hello,

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 6:05 PM Ali Reza Hayati  wrote:

> Since the accusations are false, we're asking FSF to resist this
> pressure and continue work for the good of the software libre movement.

Why do you keep saying the "accusations are false"? There have been
dozens (hundreds?) of accounts? Are you saying they are all lies?

Steve

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Ali Reza Hayati]

On 26/03/2021 18:56, Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss wrote:

However, if you use the wrong pronoun once and get corrected, then do it 
again and keep getting it wrong. That could be construed as you not 
listening or respecting that person.


Yes. That is disrespectful but assault? I don't think so.

We live in a society that meant to be equal, which is why women can join 
the Armed forces, along side men, join the police, in both cases we all 
bring our individuality to the job,  their own traits, strengths and 
weaknesses.  Which we have regardless of our gender.


Exactly for that reason, that's not sexism. Men and women are equal so 
they should be treated equally with justice. Just because someone is man 
or woman, that doesn't make them valuable. Some women are less valuable 
in some matters than men, and some men are less valuable than women in 
some matters. It's just a work thing not humanitarian thing. I run a 
company in which all my high ranking employees are women. Not a single 
man in my company did prove to have ability to have responsibilities I 
gave o my women employees. Am I now sexist towards men?


Sometimes, you should ignore the gender/sex and just treat people as humans.

Here in the UK, we have an equality act. This DOES have provisions for 
gender specific roles, such as a female worker to work with a female 
with physical / learning disabilities for example.


A female or male officer may work with victims of sexual assault / rape 
or other sexual crimes that is gender specific.


Procedures need to be in place to make people feel safe,  this is not 
simply the people around you, it is down to the room layout,  it can 
also be non verbal language,  how we position our hands while talking. 
Not because we HAVE to do that, but because it is the right thing to do 
for everyone.


If you talk to a young child you get to their level, face to face at a 
distance so you don't tower above them, you respect the personal space 
of others,  (not just in the current social distancing context),


You generally have no idea what the other persons personal history is, 
so a small thing to you, may actually be quite a lot to them.


Lets move forward and build a community that is welcoming and respectful.


I fully agree with what you said. However, I don't see any conflict here 
between what you say and what I defend. I still stand with RMS in this 
specific matter.



Paul



___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss



--
Ali Reza Hayati (https://alirezahayati.com)
Libre culture activist and privacy advocate
PGP: B7DC C419 C0ED 05D5 6535 1BD3 2A7F A925 75A3 C354



OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

A few thoughts.

[murph]

I'd like to share an experience of mine with Richard Stallman, and
some reflections on the current situation.

In about 2010 or so, I went to the Trenton Computer Festival.  Richard
was slated to talk.  It was a treat to have him speak close to home
for me.  I also noticed that he was listed as a leader in Open Source,
and I thought that it would be amusing to see how he would react to
that.  Maybe some witty barbs, and an explanation of the difference
between the Free and Open movements, as a learning experience for the
organizers, as well as the audience.

I was wrong.  It was not amusing.

I had been an associate member of the Free Software Foundation (FSF)
for a short time at that point, and I was convinced that Free Software
was (and still is) worthy of praise, and a brilliant idea for enabling
people to be free through software that they use.

When Richard was on stage, and found out about the "Open Source"
moniker, he was outraged.  I don't recall his words of over a decade
ago, but I thought I recall more than a little cursing.  Regardless of
the exact words, it was unbecoming of someone of his stature.  It was
less statesman, and more temper tantrum.

There was quite a bit of complaining, and he wasn't sure that he could
go on.  He was so disturbed by the misrepresentation. He eventually
regained his composure, and gave a speech about Free Software.

I walked away that day, not energized about supporting Free Software,
but instead thinking about the man that was in the front of the room
talking about it.  Was this the right person to further that cause?  I
was a new member then, so I didn't really feel it was my place to
bring this to the FSF.  I just let it go.  Perhaps I should not have.
Maybe I should have sent an email then, and try to raise these
concerns.

I still think that Richard is a very smart man, and his codification
of Free Software is a gift to all of us.  I also think that his public
persona is not one that best serves the FSF in any sort of leadership
capacity.

I haven't personally seen the abuse that people have reported, but I
have seen plenty of cringey moments in other talks and at LibrePlanet.
These moments make it easy to believe that he has said the hurtful
things that have been reported.  I'm not in any of the groups that he
has been insensitive towards, so I don't think it's my place to judge
that directly.

I don't wish to stop him from speaking his mind, frankly.  There are
plenty of people that speak without regard to others' feelings.  I
just don't think that he is someone that I can get behind and say that
he represents me.  Being reelected to the board signifies that his
present actions are acceptable, since nothing seems to have changed
other than the passing of time.   I can't get behind it, and the fact
that the board reinstated him shows poor judgment on their part, and
makes me unsure of their judgment in other matters.

Is the FSF truly only about Richard?  This is an opportunity to show
that the FSF and Free Software can continue on without the direct
guiding of Richard.  (Who will most likely not live forever,
regardless of the current situation)

I would hate to see the idea of Free Software become a relic of the
past, with the FSF as the curators of those neglected ideals simply
because they could not see beyond a single individual.

If Free Software cannot continue on without Richard's personal
intervention, perhaps the idea is not as strong as I thought, and
hoped it would be.

Thanks for hearing me out.


  --murph  (Associate FSF member)

___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss]

On 26/03/2021 14:03, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:

On 26/03/2021 18:19, Deb Nicholson wrote:


    An interesting thing about men who harass women is that they usually
    don't do it to men. Men who let the community know that they "don't
    believe in harassment" are the last people to find out it's 
happening,

    because no one feels safe telling them.


I believe in harassment and I do stand against any person who harass 
people, no matter they're women or men. But someone's feelings being 
hurt is not harassment.


However, if you use the wrong pronoun once and get corrected, then do it 
again and keep getting it wrong. That could be construed as you not 
listening or respecting that person.


For example, and only example, asking someone out or calling someone by 
wrong pronouns may hurt person's feelings but that's no harassment. Or, 
telling a person who is a woman that she's not as useful as some other 
person who is a man is not sexism.



> telling a person who is a woman that she's not as useful as some other
> person who is a man is not sexism.

We live in a society that meant to be equal, which is why women can join 
the Armed forces, along side men, join the police, in both cases we all 
bring our individuality to the job,  their own traits, strengths and 
weaknesses.  Which we have regardless of our gender.


Here in the UK, we have an equality act. This DOES have provisions for 
gender specific roles, such as a female worker to work with a female 
with physical / learning disabilities for example.


A female or male officer may work with victims of sexual assault / rape 
or other sexual crimes that is gender specific.


Procedures need to be in place to make people feel safe,  this is not 
simply the people around you, it is down to the room layout,  it can 
also be non verbal language,  how we position our hands while talking. 
Not because we HAVE to do that, but because it is the right thing to do 
for everyone.


If you talk to a young child you get to their level, face to face at a 
distance so you don't tower above them, you respect the personal space 
of others,  (not just in the current social distancing context),


You generally have no idea what the other persons personal history is, 
so a small thing to you, may actually be quite a lot to them.


Lets move forward and build a community that is welcoming and respectful.


Paul




OpenPGP_0x8EA91B51E27E3D99.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira via libreplanet-discuss]

Em 25/03/2021 20:57, Ali Reza Hayati escreveu:
> FSF board has received lots of messages today and there's no need to add to 
> the pile. Please send your support for RMS to i...@fsf.org and ask them to 
> resist pressures and stay with us.
> 
> Software libre is a matter of justice. If we can learn one thing from the 
> whole movement is to keep our principals and fight for justice. FSF made a 
> mistake back in 2019 and that was not to defend RMS against false 
> accusations. Today, we can make that right by supporting a wonderful 
> honorable man.
> 
> Show your support by sending messages to i...@fsf.org. Do it now, later may 
> be late.

All this is complicated subject. There is no way to know if it was or wasn't 
the board the one responsible for electing RMS back to it. It could have been 
the other voting members, whose list I don't know where it is, how to contact 
them, or what they do.

So all letter so far seem imprecise in this case, since they are asking to 
either clear the board positions or attacking staff or any voting member 
without proof that these parts were involved.

Any important change must happen from inside, so either people start joining as 
board members or (unlisted?) voting members and demand change, or we are bound 
to walk in circles. For whichever side, except when there is excessive pressure 
or stress involved, for me it doesn't seem a good reason to leave the voting 
position if you do care to make change, since every one who leaves will 
contribute to more percentage growth of those who oppose whichever person is 
leaving due to this mess.


-- 
* Ativista do software livre
* https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
* Membro dos grupos avaliadores de
* Software (Free Software Directory)
* Distribuições de sistemas (FreedSoftware)
* Sites (Free JavaScript Action Team)
* Não sou advogado e não fomento os não livres
* Sempre veja o spam/lixo eletrônico do teu e-mail
* Ou coloque todos os recebidos na caixa de entrada
* Sempre assino e-mails com OpenPGP
* Chave pública: vide endereço anterior
* Qualquer outro pode ser fraude
* Se não tens OpenPGP, ignore o anexo "signature.asc"
* Ao enviar anexos
* Docs., planilhas e apresentações: use OpenDocument
* Outros tipos: vide endereço anterior
* Use protocolos de comunicação federadas
* Vide endereço anterior
* Mensagens secretas somente via
* XMPP com OMEMO
* E-mail criptografado e assinado com OpenPGP



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Support RMS

[Deb Nicholson]

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:04 AM Ali Reza Hayati <[1]hay...@riseup.net>
   wrote:

 On 26/03/2021 18:19, Deb Nicholson wrote:
 > An interesting thing about men who harass women is that they
 usually
 > don't do it to men. Men who let the community know that they
 "don't
 > believe in harassment" are the last people to find out it's
 happening,
 > because no one feels safe telling them.
 I believe in harassment and I do stand against any person who harass
 people, no matter they're women or men. But someone's feelings being
 hurt is not harassment.
 For example, and only example, asking someone out or calling someone
 by
 wrong pronouns may hurt person's feelings but that's no harassment.
 Or,
 telling a person who is a woman that she's not as useful as some
 other
 person who is a man is not sexism.
 Again, I'm not accusing you of lying, I just don't know the whole
 story
 so I can't make decision.
 Since 2019, I've seen stories and articles that accuse RMS of
 harassment
 and assault which when I read carefully, I see only
 misunderstandings.
 What is happening now, specially that so-called open letter is based
 on
 misunderstandings and some lies, not truth. I oppose that.
 Again, sorry for your experience.
 > Hundreds of people have been driven away for free software for
 many,
 > many years. Women have stories of his behavior going back to
 MIT. A few
 > of those women are still in tech and could've been
 contributing to free
 > software for the last 30 years. We lose women and people who
 won't
 > stand for the harassment of women all the time.
 This may be a political issue. I stand with women who are harassed,
 but
 I don't believe all women. I believe proof, not words. I don't
 accuse
 anybody of lying, I only can't stand somewhere when I'm not
 presented
 with any proof.
 > I'm sorry that you are unwilling to believe the women who have
 worked
 > closely with RMS in the FSF office or on the GNU project. Or
 the women
 > he has interacted with at tech conferences or sci-fi
 conferences. Or
 > the women he has mistreated at MIT.
 > I hope that you will consider that all of us would rather be
 doing
 > something else with our time and the only reason to speak up
 is because
 > we care about the future of free software.
 > Best,
 > Deb
 I'm willing to believe any proof, so far, there haven't been any
 proof.
 Sorry you see me like this, I just can't decide where to stand
 without
 being presented by any proof. I understand that may hurt people, but
 I'm
 not willing to hurt others because I heard stories.

   Well, unless women start recording every social interaction they have
   all the time, then I think you aren't ever going to get the "proof" you
   are waiting for. I'm not a huge fan of normalizing constant
   surveillance in every social situation, so I think we are going to
   continue to disagree on what constitutes "enough proof" of harassment
   in person. I don't believe that over 100 women would make up a story
   about being harassed by the same person, especially when it matches
   what I've personally witnessed and especially when it is a pretty
   thankless claim to make.
   I can tell you there is plenty of proof of gendered harassment on the
   GNU mailing list, but RMS has chosen to keep that list private.
   Sincerely,
   Deb

 >
 >   On March 26, 2021 1:18:13 PM UTC, Deb Nicholson
 >   <[2][2]d...@eximiousproductions.com> wrote:
 >   >Hi,
 >   >I'm a former FSF staff person and a former GNU maintainer
 who has
 >   left most
 >   >of the FSF & GNU mailing lists that I was on because of the
 >   extremely
 >   >toxic, harassment-filled environments on those lists. I
 stayed on
 >   the
 >   >LibrePlanet list because it's usually ok and I appreciate
 seeing
 >   the
 >   >occasional campaign messages and actions to take in support
 of free
 >   >software.
 >   >
 >   >RMS inspires a toxic, sexist and unrepentant culture. I'm
 one of
 >   the people
 >   >who has asked him -- many times -- to take a strong stance
 against
 >   sexism
 >   >in GNU, to stop treating women as second-class citizens,
 and to
 >   re-consider
 >   >his utterly clueless and disrespectful treatment of
 transgender
 >   people in
 >   >our communities.
 >   >
 >   >I want free software to win. I want everyone to be able to
 choose
 >   free
 >   >software for everything. There is no way for free software
 to win
 >  

Re: Support RMS

[Ali Reza Hayati]

On 26/03/2021 18:19, Deb Nicholson wrote:


An interesting thing about men who harass women is that they usually
don't do it to men. Men who let the community know that they "don't
believe in harassment" are the last people to find out it's happening,
because no one feels safe telling them.


I believe in harassment and I do stand against any person who harass 
people, no matter they're women or men. But someone's feelings being 
hurt is not harassment.


For example, and only example, asking someone out or calling someone by 
wrong pronouns may hurt person's feelings but that's no harassment. Or, 
telling a person who is a woman that she's not as useful as some other 
person who is a man is not sexism.


Again, I'm not accusing you of lying, I just don't know the whole story 
so I can't make decision.


Since 2019, I've seen stories and articles that accuse RMS of harassment 
and assault which when I read carefully, I see only misunderstandings.


What is happening now, specially that so-called open letter is based on 
misunderstandings and some lies, not truth. I oppose that.


Again, sorry for your experience.

Hundreds of people have been driven away for free software for many,
many years. Women have stories of his behavior going back to MIT. A few
of those women are still in tech and could've been contributing to free
software for the last 30 years. We lose women and people who won't
stand for the harassment of women all the time.


This may be a political issue. I stand with women who are harassed, but 
I don't believe all women. I believe proof, not words. I don't accuse 
anybody of lying, I only can't stand somewhere when I'm not presented 
with any proof.



I'm sorry that you are unwilling to believe the women who have worked
closely with RMS in the FSF office or on the GNU project. Or the women
he has interacted with at tech conferences or sci-fi conferences. Or
the women he has mistreated at MIT.
I hope that you will consider that all of us would rather be doing
something else with our time and the only reason to speak up is because
we care about the future of free software.
Best,
Deb


I'm willing to believe any proof, so far, there haven't been any proof. 
Sorry you see me like this, I just can't decide where to stand without 
being presented by any proof. I understand that may hurt people, but I'm 
not willing to hurt others because I heard stories.




  On March 26, 2021 1:18:13 PM UTC, Deb Nicholson
  <[2]d...@eximiousproductions.com> wrote:
  >Hi,
  >I'm a former FSF staff person and a former GNU maintainer who has
  left most
  >of the FSF & GNU mailing lists that I was on because of the
  extremely
  >toxic, harassment-filled environments on those lists. I stayed on
  the
  >LibrePlanet list because it's usually ok and I appreciate seeing
  the
  >occasional campaign messages and actions to take in support of free
  >software.
  >
  >RMS inspires a toxic, sexist and unrepentant culture. I'm one of
  the people
  >who has asked him -- many times -- to take a strong stance against
  sexism
  >in GNU, to stop treating women as second-class citizens, and to
  re-consider
  >his utterly clueless and disrespectful treatment of transgender
  people in
  >our communities.
  >
  >I want free software to win. I want everyone to be able to choose
  free
  >software for everything. There is no way for free software to win
  if
  >hundreds of previously interested people are leaving after they get
  sick of
  >the hateful, sexist and intolerant parts of our communities. People
  take
  >their cue from RMS and he has demonstrated over and over again that
  he is
  >not interested in removing intolerance. If we want a movement that
  grows,
  >instead of a quirky and toxic private club, then RMS shouldn't
  lead.
  >
  >Sincerely,
  >Deb Nicholson
  >
  >On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:31 AM Ali Reza Hayati
  <[3]hay...@riseup.net> wrote:
  >
  >> Hello Danny.
  >>
  >> I'm sorry that your feelings are hurt but I don't see anything
  wrong
  >> here. Dark humor is everywhere and many people like it. I've seen
  gay
  >> people liking dark humor about gays for example. As I said, after
  all,
  >> that's just jokes and humor.
  >>
  >> About being offended, again that's not a problem with RMS. Maybe
  he
  >> hasn't be nice to you or people you know but if you want a nice
  person
  >> to lead a foundation, you may need a kid, not a grown up person.
  Every
  >> person may upset you or others in some way. I've upset many
  people in my
  >> life without any intention, to that I apologize to them.
  >>
  >> If you believe RMS is not a good person, that's your opinion and
  

Re: Support RMS

[Deb Nicholson]

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 9:39 AM Ali Reza Hayati <[1]hay...@riseup.net>
   wrote:

 Hello Deb,
 I hope you're well.


   Thanks, you too.

 Sorry for your experience. However, I should mention that I've been
 working directly with RMS along with many women and never seen such
 thing. I can't explain anything on behalf of RMS or GNU, but I can
 talk about my personal experience and my women colleagues which was
 nothing but nice.

   An interesting thing about men who harass women is that they usually
   don't do it to men. Men who let the community know that they "don't
   believe in harassment" are the last people to find out it's happening,
   because no one feels safe telling them.

 You mentioned people leaving, I should mention thousands who are
 coming back because of RMS.

   Hundreds of people have been driven away for free software for many,
   many years. Women have stories of his behavior going back to MIT. A few
   of those women are still in tech and could've been contributing to free
   software for the last 30 years. We lose women and people who won't
   stand for the harassment of women all the time.

 As far as I'm concerned, RMS is not convicted of anything and there
 is no proof of harassment. Until then, I urge everybody to defend
 truth against false accusations.

   I'm sorry that you are unwilling to believe the women who have worked
   closely with RMS in the FSF office or on the GNU project. Or the women
   he has interacted with at tech conferences or sci-fi conferences. Or
   the women he has mistreated at MIT.
   I hope that you will consider that all of us would rather be doing
   something else with our time and the only reason to speak up is because
   we care about the future of free software.
   Best,
   Deb

 On March 26, 2021 1:18:13 PM UTC, Deb Nicholson
 <[2]d...@eximiousproductions.com> wrote:
 >Hi,
 >I'm a former FSF staff person and a former GNU maintainer who has
 left most
 >of the FSF & GNU mailing lists that I was on because of the
 extremely
 >toxic, harassment-filled environments on those lists. I stayed on
 the
 >LibrePlanet list because it's usually ok and I appreciate seeing
 the
 >occasional campaign messages and actions to take in support of free
 >software.
 >
 >RMS inspires a toxic, sexist and unrepentant culture. I'm one of
 the people
 >who has asked him -- many times -- to take a strong stance against
 sexism
 >in GNU, to stop treating women as second-class citizens, and to
 re-consider
 >his utterly clueless and disrespectful treatment of transgender
 people in
 >our communities.
 >
 >I want free software to win. I want everyone to be able to choose
 free
 >software for everything. There is no way for free software to win
 if
 >hundreds of previously interested people are leaving after they get
 sick of
 >the hateful, sexist and intolerant parts of our communities. People
 take
 >their cue from RMS and he has demonstrated over and over again that
 he is
 >not interested in removing intolerance. If we want a movement that
 grows,
 >instead of a quirky and toxic private club, then RMS shouldn't
 lead.
 >
 >Sincerely,
 >Deb Nicholson
 >
 >On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:31 AM Ali Reza Hayati
 <[3]hay...@riseup.net> wrote:
 >
 >> Hello Danny.
 >>
 >> I'm sorry that your feelings are hurt but I don't see anything
 wrong
 >> here. Dark humor is everywhere and many people like it. I've seen
 gay
 >> people liking dark humor about gays for example. As I said, after
 all,
 >> that's just jokes and humor.
 >>
 >> About being offended, again that's not a problem with RMS. Maybe
 he
 >> hasn't be nice to you or people you know but if you want a nice
 person
 >> to lead a foundation, you may need a kid, not a grown up person.
 Every
 >> person may upset you or others in some way. I've upset many
 people in my
 >> life without any intention, to that I apologize to them.
 >>
 >> If you believe RMS is not a good person, that's your opinion and
 >> respectable. If you don't think RMS is a good leader, that's
 again
 >> respectable and may even be a fair point if presented well.
 >>
 >> However, that's not where RMS opposers stand today. What you've
 signed
 >> is based on false accusations and lies. When it comes to
 defending
 >> truth, that statement/letter is completely false.
 >>
 >> I still urge people to support RMS in this matter because
 defending
 >> truth is important.
 >>
 >> Again, I'm sorry that your feelings have been hurt but that's
 just your
 >> personal conflict/disappointment.
 >>
 >> On 26/03/2021 09:06, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 >> > I am having a difficult time right

Re: Support RMS

[Ali Reza Hayati]

Hello Deb,
I hope you're well.

Sorry for your experience. However, I should mention that I've been working 
directly with RMS along with many women and never seen such thing. I can't 
explain anything on behalf of RMS or GNU, but I can talk about my personal 
experience and my women colleagues which was nothing but nice.

You mentioned people leaving, I should mention thousands who are coming back 
because of RMS.

As far as I'm concerned, RMS is not convicted of anything and there is no proof 
of harassment. Until then, I urge everybody to defend truth against false 
accusations.

On March 26, 2021 1:18:13 PM UTC, Deb Nicholson  
wrote:
>Hi,
>I'm a former FSF staff person and a former GNU maintainer who has left most
>of the FSF & GNU mailing lists that I was on because of the extremely
>toxic, harassment-filled environments on those lists. I stayed on the
>LibrePlanet list because it's usually ok and I appreciate seeing the
>occasional campaign messages and actions to take in support of free
>software.
>
>RMS inspires a toxic, sexist and unrepentant culture. I'm one of the people
>who has asked him -- many times -- to take a strong stance against sexism
>in GNU, to stop treating women as second-class citizens, and to re-consider
>his utterly clueless and disrespectful treatment of transgender people in
>our communities.
>
>I want free software to win. I want everyone to be able to choose free
>software for everything. There is no way for free software to win if
>hundreds of previously interested people are leaving after they get sick of
>the hateful, sexist and intolerant parts of our communities. People take
>their cue from RMS and he has demonstrated over and over again that he is
>not interested in removing intolerance. If we want a movement that grows,
>instead of a quirky and toxic private club, then RMS shouldn't lead.
>
>Sincerely,
>Deb Nicholson
>
>On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:31 AM Ali Reza Hayati  wrote:
>
>> Hello Danny.
>>
>> I'm sorry that your feelings are hurt but I don't see anything wrong
>> here. Dark humor is everywhere and many people like it. I've seen gay
>> people liking dark humor about gays for example. As I said, after all,
>> that's just jokes and humor.
>>
>> About being offended, again that's not a problem with RMS. Maybe he
>> hasn't be nice to you or people you know but if you want a nice person
>> to lead a foundation, you may need a kid, not a grown up person. Every
>> person may upset you or others in some way. I've upset many people in my
>> life without any intention, to that I apologize to them.
>>
>> If you believe RMS is not a good person, that's your opinion and
>> respectable. If you don't think RMS is a good leader, that's again
>> respectable and may even be a fair point if presented well.
>>
>> However, that's not where RMS opposers stand today. What you've signed
>> is based on false accusations and lies. When it comes to defending
>> truth, that statement/letter is completely false.
>>
>> I still urge people to support RMS in this matter because defending
>> truth is important.
>>
>> Again, I'm sorry that your feelings have been hurt but that's just your
>> personal conflict/disappointment.
>>
>> On 26/03/2021 09:06, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
>> > I am having a difficult time right now. This person Georgia shares
>> > several years of experience working at FSF and directly with RMS. Ali,
>> > their testimony makes me think that maybe the free software movement
>> > needs to move beyond RMS. Here are their words, copied from
>> > https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1374504389155508232
>> > :
>> > “I worked at the FSF from 2015-2018 & was shop steward for a while. I
>> > recall having a months (MONTHS) long conversation with ED John Sullivan
>> > about why racist & sexist 'hacker humor' from the 90s needed to be
>> > removed from gnu.org . rms didn't get why it was
>> harmful.
>> >
>> > Also the abortion joke ('contributed' by rms) in a technical manual? He
>> > threw a fit when it was removed, & the energy many people (who respected
>> > him!!) put in to attempting to educate him in why that wasn't cool.
>> >
>> > The thing that randos who have never had to actually work with rms don't
>> > understand is that MANY people who deeply respected him tried to help
>> > him learn to not objectify women, shout over others at Libreplanet as if
>> > it was his birthday party, stop shit like 'emacs virgins'
>> >
>> > Meanwhile that energy, utterly wasted, could've been spent advocating
>> > for free to software and building the inclusive, impractical community
>> > so many people WANT. Spent, instead, on a man's ego, over and over.
>> >
>> > This whole thing is incredibly depressing. The free software community
>> > is largely full of interesting, rad people - I got to work with a bunch
>> > of people I like & respect & feel inspired by, organizing Libreplanet
>> > was my job & introduced me to am

Re: Support RMS

[Robbt E]

   A someone whose been an associate member of FSF for maybe over a decade
   I do see it as highly problematic that the FSF staff were not given a
   heads up before his return to the board was announced. The fact that
   this seemed to happen impromptu during a live event is a sign of a lack
   of leadership and planning on the part of the FSF board. I've yet to
   see any kind of letter explaining the decision or anything that shows a
   sign of understanding with regards to how divisive this decision was
   going to be.

   I appreciate RMS' many accomplishments and appreciate his unflinching
   principles with regards to Free Software. I felt like his resignation
   from the FSF board in 2019 seemed rushed and done in haste. I don't
   know if the details regarding the deliberations behind his decision
   where ever made public or if they're considered private.

   But I also think it is important if the Free Software movement is going
   to have a level of longevity it needs to grow to cultivate new
   leadership for the next generation. Perhaps this should happen in
   efforts parallel to the FSF. I am personally not a big adherent to the
   notion of "software purity" and don't see it as what should be the
   strategic focus of the movement. But I respect those who find this
   useful as an ethical parameter for how they make their decisions
   regarding technology.

   I do think we need to not get distracted by the whole focus on RMS and
   judging him as good or bad as a person and continue to think about the
   overall mission of the free software movement.

   In my life I tend to be pragmatic in encouraging people to adopt free
   software at whatever level they can. I encourage and have helped many
   organizations deploy websites using free software and have been able to
   introduce free software alternatives to proprietary software. But one
   problem I see is that many people who would likely be supporters of the
   free software movement aren't aware of it and the arguments we make.
   And if they are aware they don't feel capable of adhering to the
   abstention from using proprietary software completely.

   We need to continue to make new and useful arguments and also build
   free software that is user friendly and accessible. I think the FSF has
   done this through some educational videos and campaigns and I
   appreciate the work that has been done but the FSF is a relatively
   small organization dwarfed by the immensity of tech giants and so the
   movement must be much larger than a single organization and certainly
   larger than adherence to the thoughts of one individual regardless of
   how well articulated their principles are.

   I also think it is short-sighted to dismiss other peoples feelings as
   "their problem" and shows a lack of empathy that is an important thing
   in building community. It is hard to wrangle with these kind of
   problems and I think that electronic communication has certainly made
   it way easier to both offend, find offensive things and rally an angry
   mob and has done very little to facilitate the sort of listening and
   expansion of perspective that is useful for resolving these kind of
   conflicts. The solution should not be exile of those who offend people
   but it also shouldn't be to disregard people who find someone else to
   be offensive or problematic. I don't know what the balance is or how
   this can be done but I kind of doubt that we will be able to accomplish
   this by tossing bytes into the mailboxes of each other and certainly
   not if we continue to feel fueled by righteousness on way or another.
   Or perhaps I am wrong and those who are able to rally the most
   righteous indignation to their side will "win". But I suspect based
   upon my past experiences with organizational conflict that the
   organization itself (and its mission) will be ravaged by the fighting
   if people continue to raise the rhetorical and inflammatory debate.

   Anyways, I am not sure how this will be received as I haven't really
   posted all that much and other than my presentation at last year's
   LibreTime and attending the 2019 in person conference I don't know a
   lot of you. I think we all have different perspectives and I just hope
   we can try to figure out how to work together and continue to focus on
   building free software and a movement that empowers people to
   understand its importance and to also increase its importance by
   getting more people to use and create free software. I would love to
   see the level of investment in free software increase to the point that
   we weren't depending upon large corporations to fund "open-source"
   software development and instead could build the social infrastructure
   to support people learning how to code and contributing code with less
   of a focus on profit, but this is a larger discussion and I know there
   are a lot of models out there already.

   Later,

  Ro

Re: Support RMS

[Deb Nicholson]

   Hi,
   I'm a former FSF staff person and a former GNU maintainer who has left
   most of the FSF & GNU mailing lists that I was on because of the
   extremely toxic, harassment-filled environments on those lists. I
   stayed on the LibrePlanet list because it's usually ok and I appreciate
   seeing the occasional campaign messages and actions to take in support
   of free software.
   RMS inspires a toxic, sexist and unrepentant culture. I'm one of the
   people who has asked him -- many times -- to take a strong stance
   against sexism in GNU, to stop treating women as second-class citizens,
   and to re-consider his utterly clueless and disrespectful treatment of
   transgender people in our communities.
   I want free software to win. I want everyone to be able to choose free
   software for everything. There is no way for free software to win if
   hundreds of previously interested people are leaving after they get
   sick of the hateful, sexist and intolerant parts of our communities.
   People take their cue from RMS and he has demonstrated over and over
   again that he is not interested in removing intolerance. If we want a
   movement that grows, instead of a quirky and toxic private club, then
   RMS shouldn't lead.
   Sincerely,
   Deb Nicholson

   On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:31 AM Ali Reza Hayati <[1]hay...@riseup.net>
   wrote:

 Hello Danny.
 I'm sorry that your feelings are hurt but I don't see anything wrong
 here. Dark humor is everywhere and many people like it. I've seen
 gay
 people liking dark humor about gays for example. As I said, after
 all,
 that's just jokes and humor.
 About being offended, again that's not a problem with RMS. Maybe he
 hasn't be nice to you or people you know but if you want a nice
 person
 to lead a foundation, you may need a kid, not a grown up person.
 Every
 person may upset you or others in some way. I've upset many people
 in my
 life without any intention, to that I apologize to them.
 If you believe RMS is not a good person, that's your opinion and
 respectable. If you don't think RMS is a good leader, that's again
 respectable and may even be a fair point if presented well.
 However, that's not where RMS opposers stand today. What you've
 signed
 is based on false accusations and lies. When it comes to defending
 truth, that statement/letter is completely false.
 I still urge people to support RMS in this matter because defending
 truth is important.
 Again, I'm sorry that your feelings have been hurt but that's just
 your
 personal conflict/disappointment.
 On 26/03/2021 09:06, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 > I am having a difficult time right now. This person Georgia shares
 > several years of experience working at FSF and directly with RMS.
 Ali,
 > their testimony makes me think that maybe the free software
 movement
 > needs to move beyond RMS. Here are their words, copied from
 > [2]https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1374504389155508232
 > <[3]https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1374504389155508232>:
 > “I worked at the FSF from 2015-2018 & was shop steward for a
 while. I
 > recall having a months (MONTHS) long conversation with ED John
 Sullivan
 > about why racist & sexist 'hacker humor' from the 90s needed to be
 > removed from [4]gnu.org <[5]http://gnu.org>. rms didn't get why it
 was harmful.
 >
 > Also the abortion joke ('contributed' by rms) in a technical
 manual? He
 > threw a fit when it was removed, & the energy many people (who
 respected
 > him!!) put in to attempting to educate him in why that wasn't
 cool.
 >
 > The thing that randos who have never had to actually work with rms
 don't
 > understand is that MANY people who deeply respected him tried to
 help
 > him learn to not objectify women, shout over others at Libreplanet
 as if
 > it was his birthday party, stop shit like 'emacs virgins'
 >
 > Meanwhile that energy, utterly wasted, could've been spent
 advocating
 > for free to software and building the inclusive, impractical
 community
 > so many people WANT. Spent, instead, on a man's ego, over and
 over.
 >
 > This whole thing is incredibly depressing. The free software
 community
 > is largely full of interesting, rad people - I got to work with a
 bunch
 > of people I like & respect & feel inspired by, organizing
 Libreplanet
 > was my job & introduced me to amazing people from across the world
 >
 > free software has the ability to do so much good, but there's an
 ugly
 > cult of personality around rms, & the fact that he faced
 consequences
 > for his creepy Epdtein-adjacent comments and not the decades of
 shitty
 > behavior towards women is infuriating & excuses his return
 >
 > It's eas

Re: Support RMS

[Ali Reza Hayati]

Hello Danny.

I'm sorry that your feelings are hurt but I don't see anything wrong 
here. Dark humor is everywhere and many people like it. I've seen gay 
people liking dark humor about gays for example. As I said, after all, 
that's just jokes and humor.


About being offended, again that's not a problem with RMS. Maybe he 
hasn't be nice to you or people you know but if you want a nice person 
to lead a foundation, you may need a kid, not a grown up person. Every 
person may upset you or others in some way. I've upset many people in my 
life without any intention, to that I apologize to them.


If you believe RMS is not a good person, that's your opinion and 
respectable. If you don't think RMS is a good leader, that's again 
respectable and may even be a fair point if presented well.


However, that's not where RMS opposers stand today. What you've signed 
is based on false accusations and lies. When it comes to defending 
truth, that statement/letter is completely false.


I still urge people to support RMS in this matter because defending 
truth is important.


Again, I'm sorry that your feelings have been hurt but that's just your 
personal conflict/disappointment.


On 26/03/2021 09:06, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
I am having a difficult time right now. This person Georgia shares 
several years of experience working at FSF and directly with RMS. Ali, 
their testimony makes me think that maybe the free software movement 
needs to move beyond RMS. Here are their words, copied from
https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1374504389155508232 
:
“I worked at the FSF from 2015-2018 & was shop steward for a while. I 
recall having a months (MONTHS) long conversation with ED John Sullivan 
about why racist & sexist 'hacker humor' from the 90s needed to be 
removed from gnu.org . rms didn't get why it was harmful.


Also the abortion joke ('contributed' by rms) in a technical manual? He 
threw a fit when it was removed, & the energy many people (who respected 
him!!) put in to attempting to educate him in why that wasn't cool.


The thing that randos who have never had to actually work with rms don't 
understand is that MANY people who deeply respected him tried to help 
him learn to not objectify women, shout over others at Libreplanet as if 
it was his birthday party, stop shit like 'emacs virgins'


Meanwhile that energy, utterly wasted, could've been spent advocating 
for free to software and building the inclusive, impractical community 
so many people WANT. Spent, instead, on a man's ego, over and over.


This whole thing is incredibly depressing. The free software community 
is largely full of interesting, rad people - I got to work with a bunch 
of people I like & respect & feel inspired by, organizing Libreplanet 
was my job & introduced me to amazing people from across the world


free software has the ability to do so much good, but there's an ugly 
cult of personality around rms, & the fact that he faced consequences 
for his creepy Epdtein-adjacent comments and not the decades of shitty 
behavior towards women is infuriating & excuses his return


It's easy for people to dismiss shitty words, & because we don't focus 
on shitty actions (& actions are easily dismissed by assholes sealioning 
for 'evidence' - bc "I saw it/experienced it" is NEVER enough) it's 
possible for a floundering FSF to 'uncancel' rms now. DON'T LET THEM


My github account was, uh, dusty, to say the least, but I made a pull 
request in order to sign on to this letter.

https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ 

One final thing: do not shit on FSF staff about this. They didn't ask 
for this, they weren't notified in advance of rms' apparently impromptu 
announcement, they labor for the organization and for the community 
every day. Put pressure on the board and the executive director.”


The letter is signed by 40 organizations and over 500 individuals, 
including dozens of former FSF staff and board members.


On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 6:04 PM Ali Reza Hayati > wrote:


Recently, RMS announced that he's back on FSF board of directors. Now,
some organizations and people are attacking FSF and RMS and are asking
them to resign.

Since the accusations are false, we're asking FSF to resist this
pressure and continue work for the good of the software libre movement.

Sending message to i...@fsf.org  is a way of
showing your support. They
are acting like mobs and bullies, we should not step down from our
principals, which are fighting for justice and truth.

On 26/03/2021 04:49, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
 > I’m not clear on why I should send a message of support for RMS.
 >
 > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:57 PM Ali Reza Hayati
mailto:hay...@riseup.net>
 > >> wrote:
 >
 >