@fsfe i'm not aware that it was even tried to take rms to court.
"you too, brutus?" is what remains. nobody will trust you anymore. you do what fits yourself best, virtue signalling about rms but if it's about your own leader, another standard applies.
@bonifartius addendum: i don't think that any allegations regarding rms or matthias are warranting any action.
@fsfe My sarcastic comment aside, I do appreciate that the FSFE stuck to the facts in its message, rather than piling onto the calumny party. Yours is a letter I _could_ sign without feeling dirty.
rms has to go, but matthias kirschner can stay with roughly the same allegations in the room? nice double standards :)
@fsfe The difference here is that the "allegations" against RMS are based on wrongthink - not on any actual wrongdoing. I'm truly ashamed of having supported the FSFE with donations and volunteer work in the past.
@fsfe Thanks for this! I didn't realize the FSFE was independent from the FSF.
This is a BIG deal and much appreciated:
"Therefore, in the current situation we see ourselves unable to collaborate both with the FSF and any other organisation in which Richard Stallman has a leading position."
Nice touch to see that, of all ways to collect signatures and put forward a letter, they chose to use Github, well-known for its outstanding treatment of their own employees, not to mention their attempts at censorship, and the fact that they belong to the decades-long FOSS arch-nemesis.
Honestly, I initially thought this was a prank. This world makes less sense to me every day goes by.
@fsfe I love the work that you do but I feel like this is silly. RMS has done incredible work and pioneered free software and I don't think any of his actions warrant this witch hunt.
I think the real liability is unquestioningly accepting misinformation, and allowing it to cloud our judgement.
The deviation of your irrational behaviour from your intellectual ability / critical thinking proves that you are willing to irreversibly risk the reputation/goal of the entire free software movement simply because you don't like someone, or, because of a personal grudge.
Preliminary board statement on FSF governance ~ https://www.fsf.org/news/preliminary-board-statement-on-fsf-governance
edit:"must not" -> "should not"
It would be easier for me and you, if the 90% of your statement had been to criticize the governance of the @fsf and its transparency (internally first, at the FSF's member's forum via an official representative of yours), and *after that* with a public statement like this one: https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.en.html
Why so rush for a statement just 24h after the surprise? Also, the 90% of your statement is like you have accepted the misinformation of media regarding RMS being sexist. Why?
@fsfe does the FSFE stand by this statement in light of today's events and the FSF's refusal to back down to mob justice?
@fsfe As terrible decision as to bring back RMS with this lack of transparency. Make this statement 24h after the announcement without allowing the FSF to explain themselves is just simply wrong, leaving yourself to the flow of the mob damaging the community. I think @fsfe do a great job but this is a mistake, a decision lacking of meditation and democracy that helps no one.
@clacke @fsfe Right, I was mistaken with the date.But at that time I was still trying to digest the news, and I was at RMS talk at LibrePlanet when he announced it, so I had time. But still after three days with no much information what I had were questions "Why?", "is good to have RMS back?, "was this the correct way?", and asked FSF explanations. Instead, many organisations claiming being "sisters" just give their back to them, without demanding explanations, as if awaiting for this to come...
@clacke @fsfe I mean, I just sincerely don't understand that position. If someone, even more my "sister", does something that I don't have much info about I will wait until being able to have direct contact with the other person and try to understand what's happening. Look, in Debian they've done it. After some weeks they've (all contributors, no just the board) vote about how to face this issue. It turns out that "Debian will not issue a public statement on this issue" https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_rms/index.html
@clacke @fsfe And last, I'm not even sure whether I want RMS there. And I acknowledge that FSFs move wasn't transparent and risky, but to turn the back in this ways I don't think is a good choice either. And more when the reasons are not clear. @fsfe doesn't say why they don't want RMS there, they don's say of which charges they accuse him. He might be an asshole, stubborn and not appropriate for this positions but he's nothing that he's being attacked for.
@clacke @fsfe Haha, it's actually great to being able to discuss about this with someone nicely. In twitter was the war... So it's great to hear the thought of the others and try to understand. And I indeed understand, as said I was shocked too for a week haha. But again, our community is small and fragile and this kind of tough statements just make more damage.
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!