I think rms needs to go, but I didn't sign the letter.
Originally I didn't sign because I found the choice of hosting ridiculous and also because I don't have any real stakes in the FSF.
The discussions in the last few days have made me add the reason that I shouldn't sign an open letter that draws the right conclusion if it argues from the wrong premises.
rms took transphobic and ablist action due to a lack of empathy, this I agree with. I don't agree that he outright defended pedophilia and in particular didn't defend this instance of pedophilia. I originally considered this a minor detail, but I have to agree that it is actually significant and makes the appendix incorrect and unjust.
Originally I didn't sign because I found the choice of hosting ridiculous and also because I don't have any real stakes in the FSF.
The discussions in the last few days have made me add the reason that I shouldn't sign an open letter that draws the right conclusion if it argues from the wrong premises.
rms took transphobic and ablist action due to a lack of empathy, this I agree with. I don't agree that he outright defended pedophilia and in particular didn't defend this instance of pedophilia. I originally considered this a minor detail, but I have to agree that it is actually significant and makes the appendix incorrect and unjust.
Nevertheless, FSF would benefit if rms and the board that enabled him stepped down. What has happened in the last few years is that the people who should be on the board have one by one given up and left. The ones that remain brought him back or have legitimized the decision by the others by staying on.
I expect certain GNU projects to start the path toward being non-GNU projects now.
I expect certain GNU projects to start the path toward being non-GNU projects now.
@clacke Since 2019, there’s also this effort I contribute to to “reclaim GNU”:
https://gnu.tools/
We (GNU hackers and maintainers) think GNU is not about RMS, it’s “ours”, and it’s our duty to build a welcoming and cooperating project that advances user freedom.
@eliasr It’s nothing really unusual for an umbrella free software project, but discussions on gnu.org mailing lists led to nothing but intimidation and harassment:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2020-02/threads.html
gnu.tools started as a safe space where this discussion can happen.
@eliasr The plan is allow interested GNU hackers to discuss and decide on the direction of the project and on day-to-day project-wide operations.
For this, we first collectively wrote the “GNU Social Contract” last year as a document that explains what the project is about and what signatories commit to.
The next step is to formalize the structure—for example what it means to be a member of the Assembly.