Elias @eliasr@librem.one

@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
(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
(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
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.

@martijnbraam @postmarketOS I tried it, I really liked the pmbootstrap tool that presented options so nicely adapted to the device. Like, I did not have to look up which options are available/allowed for my device, pmbootstrap already knew that and only presented those options. Very cool.

@clacke @lanodan Ah, they made it optional. Probably part of the effort to allow programs to be typed with as few characters as possible, seems to have been considered an important goal back then for some reason. Now I'm not so sure that being able to type short-and-cryptic code is good at all.

I think it would be good if we had non-optional LET syntax or similar in C, that would make our programs easier to understand, and then we could have skipped the double == in comparisons.

@lanodan @clacke Because in C you can write in your program things like this:

x = 5;
y = 2;
x = y;

that is complete bogus for a mathematician, if we just established that x is 5 and y is 2, then how the hell can x suddenly be equal to y. Madness! 🙂

Mathematicians understandably like the arrow or := much better.

@lanodan @clacke I had to look it up now, looks like PASCAL appeared in 1970 and C in 1972 so it's only 2 years difference. But C is a new language, compared to PASCAL. 🙂

About the assignment operator, I was teaching C to beginners and there was always the question why we need to write == in if statements. I wanted to say to the students, "well, I often wonder that myself".

It is especially confusing for students who know a lot of math, then assignment with a simple = is really confusing.

@clacke Looking in that 1974 ADT paper, for the examples they use some variant of PASCAL.

I remember coding in PASCAL. Takes me back to my early coding days, it was the second language I learned, after BASIC.

One really good thing in PASCAL that I saw now in that paper, is how you write assignments, to set x to 5 you write
x := 5
In my opinion that was much better than the x=5 that we write nowadays in these fancy-pancy new languages like C. 🙂

@akenyg Ja, du fick väl rätt då kanske, medan jag lät mig luras av namnbytet. 😕

@alexl@mstdn.io @FreePietje I was hoping that he could be made to see the point in respecting the FSF because I suspect that much of the "small tech" work he is doing is made possible thanks to GPL-licensed free software. But maybe that is too much to hope for. 🙂 Sigh.

@FreePietje @aral I agree with @FreePietje here, it is relevant to ask for improved processes within the FSF, but then please do so while respecting other people.

And that hit piece, okay let's stick with the term "inaccuaracies" but if you look a little closer (please do) you will find that, well, "inaccurate" does not fully cover it. Note that the inaccurate part is by far the most damning and probably the main reason so many got so upset. Textbook example of how rumors spread, I think.

@aral Are you sure that insulting people like that is what the free software community needs right now?
https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web

@akenyg Jag kan nog hålla med där. Särskilt med tanke på namnbytet nyligen, det går ju inste ihop alls. Namnet ändras för att understryka liberalismen, samtidigt som liberalismen tydligen blivit mindre viktig för partiet i praktiken. Jag var annars glad över namnbytet, hoppades att det betydde något på riktigt, så det här känns lite snopet.

@silverwizard OK, I note that you did not comment on the fact that you spread some falsehood earlier, I hope that means you are not proud of it and will hopefully do it less in the future. Then, that is fine.

I'm going to sleep. Let's remember that we both agreed that Bradley M. Kuhn text is good, here it is again: http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html

Good night 🙂

@silverwizard No no, wait wait. I am not claiming that many accusers are lying. I have pointed to one specific falsehood which is that part regarding "entirely willing". That is false and you know it. If you forgot, please go and look it up again.

We are both aware of that falsehood, and you have been spreading that. I assume you were then not aware if was false, like so many others who have been spreading it. That is how rumors work. But now that you are aware, please stop spreading it?

@silverwizard Well you have been writing several times about RMS and "sexual harassment", but do I understand correctly now that you mean you are not accusing anyone of sexual harassment? You are just insinuating, and then you have no responsibility, you don't need to have any basis for that?

Even if you say you are not making accusations, your words matter.

Will you continue to spread the Selam G post even though you know about the significant falsehood it contains?

@silverwizard So I wonder now, what is the grounds for the accusations you are making? Please be specific, and stick to things that are true.