- repair a misogynist atmosphere[0]
- speak of people with disabilities in a respectful manner[1]
- respect people's wishes for how they would like to be addressed[2]
That's enough for his presence and outsized influence to be a problem for the organization and its community. You cannot work in or around FSF and GNU without running the risk of dealing with him and this is limiting the potential of the projects.
[0] nitter.nixnet.services/georgia…
[1] www.stallman.org/archives/2016… (on Down's syndrome)
[2] stallman.org/articles/genderle…
@clacke @alexl@mstdn.io @claudiom@mastodon.sdf.org
Welcome to my new 8-piece reflection on the #RMS controversy.
(1/8)
Having seen how this played out during the last few days and discussed it in a few different places, I am increasingly convinced that there are two separate problems in play here. It would be good if people recognized both of them, rather than inflating one and pretending the other does not exist.
@clacke @alexl@mstdn.io @claudiom@mastodon.sdf.org
(2/8)
One problem is RMS behavior that has hurt people and has driven people away from the free software movement. It is not unreasonable to wish for that to change.
The other problem regards the github letter the criticizes RMS and demands the resignation of the whole FSF board and so on. That letter is harch and disrespectful and makes very serious allegations while partly based on something false. See https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web
@clacke @alexl@mstdn.io @claudiom@mastodon.sdf.org
(3/8)
The people who signed the github letter seem to think that it does not matter if they are careless, rude and even partly dishonest, because they beleive they have such a just cause. That is a dangerous attitude.
I would argue that if your cause is important, that makes it even more important to carefully consider how you express yourself.
@clacke @alexl@mstdn.io @claudiom@mastodon.sdf.org
(4/8)
When your demands are extreme, such as demanding the founder of an organization to be kicked out, that makes it even more important to be very careful and truthful when you present your demands.
When you make grave insults against a person, you should be even more careful to make sure you have solid grounds for your accusations.
@clacke @alexl@mstdn.io @claudiom@mastodon.sdf.org
(5/8)
To understand why the github letter is so problematic, you really need to read it in detail to see how grave the insults are, and look at how it cites partly false information as evidence.
@clacke @alexl@mstdn.io @claudiom@mastodon.sdf.org
(6/8)
The fact that so many people signed the github letter is deeply worrying, because it indicates that these people do not agree to the above. They think it is fine to throw grave accusations without solid proof. They see no problem in ganging up thousands of people to harm one person.
@clacke @alexl@mstdn.io @claudiom@mastodon.sdf.org
(7/8)
I have a hard time beleiving that all those people would have signed the github letter if they had carefully read it first and thought for a moment about the consequences of their own actions. My best guess is that most of them just heard there was a petition, asked "how do I sign" and then signed it, not really knowing what it said other than it was a petition to remove RMS from the FSF.
@clacke @alexl@mstdn.io @claudiom@mastodon.sdf.org
(8/8)
Tying this back to the first problem, the github letter makes everything much worse. Giving in to the demands of the github letter would signal that it was successful, thus encouraging more such behavior in the future.
The mindset behind the github letter presents a real danger to our society in a fundamental way. If this is how we commmunicate and how we make decisions now, then we are in big trouble.
