Elias @eliasr@librem.one
- My web page
- https://eliasrudberg.se/
Human being. Programmer, sailor, researcher, teacher, student, parent, child, etc. Free/libre and open-source software (FOSS/FLOSS) enthusiast. Likes human rights, including digital rights such as privacy of communication. Casual hacker. On Mastodon since about 2020. Lives in Stockholm. He/him. No DMs.
Joined Jun 2020
@lionirdeadman@fosstodon.org
> wanting to hear the opinion of gnome developers
Yes, I still want to hear from them.
I wrote this, please read and help pass it on to others if you know other people who signed the open letter, this is for them, I would like to hear what they think about it:
What do you think about it? I really tried to make it constructive and not dismiss any concerns.
> all the divisions and "civil wars" happening.
I wrote something trying to help regarding that stuff, here:
Comment on the open letter to "remove RMS", based on the GNU Kind Communications Guidelines
Here is my own contribution to the #RMS debate, about the open letter and #fsf and so on.
Comment on the open letter to "remove RMS", based on the GNU Kind Communications Guidelines
This is not another escalation, it's something else. It's about how we communicate. I thought a lot about it. Hopefully this can reach some of the people who signed the open letter.
Boosts welcome.
@joao Nice! This is the same camera app that @martijnbraam has been working on?
@jrballesteros05 The use of such "trending" listings is a worrying trend in itself 🙂
I get particularly annoyed when supposedly serious news organizations making real journalism, like https://www.theguardian.com/ still cannot resist that idea, even they nowadays put a "most read" listing on their page. I wish they would understand that what I want from them is not to read what everyone else reads, I want to read what is good and relevant news according to The Guardian. Not "most read".
I agree, they really should allow people to remove their names. Especially since it's about a personal attack, it's understandable that some people may not want to be part of it anymore after they think it through and maybe they looked up some of the details and find they cannot really stand behind that.
If they really don't allow names to be removed, I hope someone will have the guts to say publicly "I signed not knowing this and that, now I want my name removed".
> A lot of the people on that list honestly believe they are fighting
> some "Holy War", so whatever offense they commit they feel justified.
Yes, that's the impression I got also.
For example, if I say personal attacks should be avoided, they answer that they agree with that in general but that in this particular case it's so important to get what they want that they make an exception. They throw principles out the window and they think that's acceptable "for the greater good".
Debian Votes to Issue No Statement on Stallman's Return to the FSF Board
Details about the vote: https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_002
@MatejLach Sounds a bit like one of those things where computer users are assumed to be both uninterested and fundamentally incapable of understanding anything about the technology they are using.
In my opinion it's a bad development, we should instead work towards more understanding of technology, empowering people to decide which tech they use and how.
If we assume people are stupid (I don't think that), then things like #freesoftware become meaningless as people can't tell the difference.
@lionirdeadman@fosstodon.org
> spreading lies
Now that is a serious accusation you are making, please explain what you mean.
In my opinion, spreading lies is a very bad thing to do, if I had done that I would take it back and apologize.
The people who signed the "open letter" (that you defended) appear to think otherwise. The letter does in fact spread falsehoods, as I explained to you earlier. I have not yet seen anyone apologizing for signing that.
See also this: https://edsantos.eu/on-stalman/
@shiba I agree that the letter was very unfortunate, to put it mildly.
What I'm wondering now is what to do now, in the situation we have. All those people (and organizations!) did sign that, and now I need to communicate with them after that.
My thought regarding the CoC in this case was that, by looking at things from that point of view, that could be a way of making the people who signed the letter reflect on what they have done.
What do you think? What should we do now?
The GNOME Code of Conduct says: Be friendly. Be empathetic. Be respectful.
The GNOME Foundation signed an "open letter" accusing a software freedom activist of being "misogynist, ableist, and transphobic".
Questions:
(1) Is the letter in line with the GNOME Code of Conduct?
(2) Is it okay for the GNOME Foundation, as an organization, to sign something like that?
Personally I lean towards "no" on both questions, but I would like to hear what you think, especially GNOME developers.
@lionirdeadman@fosstodon.org
done
@lionirdeadman@fosstodon.org
ok
@trregeagle Wohoo, congratulations!
Prepare yourself for some tinkering. 🙂
I found the forum at https://forums.puri.sm/ very helpful.
@jonarvid Yes, they certainly do take their time with the shipping.
Look on the bright side, though: by the time you get it, there's a good chance these fixes have been upstreamed so MMS can work for you out of the box. 😉
@clacke If you have time, I would be interested to hear what you think about those things (see also above):
- The GNOME Foundation signing the "open letter" as a whole organization, given how it is phrased and how it references inaccurate sources in the appendix.
- The GNOME Foundation signing something that would have been a clear violation of the GNOME code of conduct if posted in their own space.
For me it's hard to understand how they could do that, I really wonder what is behind it.
> pro-virus stance?
Not sure, but maybe @anonymoose is hinting at that some people (not me!) call copyleft licenses "viral" because they tend to spread. 🙂
Also, since you mentioned the GNOME Code of Conduct, the "open letter" itself would be a violation of that code of conduct if it had been posted in GNOME community spaces.
The code of conduct says, for example: Be friendly, Be empathetic, Be respectful. The open letter is very far from that.
While I understand that the GNOME Foundation can say the open letter is on Github and thus outside of GNOME community spaces so the code does not apply, to me it still seems inappropriate.
2/2
I don't mean that they voice their opinion that RMS behavior is a problem, that is not strange.
What I mean is strange is that the GNOME Foundation does it through that "open letter" given how it is phrased and how it references inaccurate sources in the appendix. I saw you wrote about that earlier so I think you understand what I mean. Otherwise see how the problems with the open letter are explained here: https://edsantos.eu/on-stalman/
1/2
- My web page
- https://eliasrudberg.se/
Human being. Programmer, sailor, researcher, teacher, student, parent, child, etc. Free/libre and open-source software (FOSS/FLOSS) enthusiast. Likes human rights, including digital rights such as privacy of communication. Casual hacker. On Mastodon since about 2020. Lives in Stockholm. He/him. No DMs.
Joined Jun 2020
