On one hand, I think Stallman cannot lead effectively under these conditions, and given the long history of accusations.
Only because people like you keep spouting this crap. The 'has become a distraction' argument has become nothing more than bland cover for cowards who won't stand up to cancel culture but also don't agree.
"Cancelers" need to be called out for the shit-stains they actually are. Cowards are who they are, personal I just make note of them for future awareness that they can't be depended on.
Only because people like you keep spouting this crap.
It's actually because people keep making claims of harassment against him, but way to marginalize them.
The 'has become a distraction' argument has become nothing more than bland cover for cowards who won't stand up to cancel culture but also don't agree.
I don't stand up to cancel culture because I am not opposed to cancel culture. Conservacucks have no right to stand up to cancel culture because they invented cancel culture. I am not a coward, and I do agree. Lots of things should be cancelled.
"Cancelers" need to be called out for the shit-stains they actually are.
Conservatives cancelled alcohol and drugs. They tried to cancel heavy metal and dungeons and dragons. They cancelled thousands of black people with nooses. Now they
I agree, some cancel culture is in order. People like yourself for instance...;)
Seriously, no, no and a thousand times no! You do not get to talk about marginalizing accusations. Because accusations without a proper hearing before a judge are and will forever remain just some people throwing niceties at someone else they don't like.
Given how much it is en vogue to accuse anyone whose name is known to more than five people of misconduct, an accusation is worth NOTHING!
I see in another comment you describe yourself as a high functioning aspergers. I think you are slightly less high functioning than you imagine.
The bit you're missing here is that someone can act very unpleasantly, and make people not want to have anything to do with them, but for their behaviour to not be criminal offence.
Stallman has repeatedly done stuff that makes people not want to have anything to do with him. He's been told specific parts of his behaviour are unpleasant. He, like you, thinks that if he isn't breaking a law, he's allowed to continue that behaviour. He can, but at the same time, that means that some people don't want anything to do with him.
At some point the people running a project need to decide who they want to include and who they want to exclude.
Should they keep a guy who is a creep, and refuses to listen to feedback as to why his behaviour is unpleasant, or do they want to keep everyone else who doesn't want to have anything to do with him?
There's a game theory aspect, where you say that he may be a creep, but the only safe and consistent response to the cancel mob is to refuse any of their demands. If the FSF board manages to show the strength to ignore the mob, the mob loses all future power over them. The reason they're so shrill and frantic about this issue is that they've been consistently acquiesced to in the open source world. They don't want that power to slip out of their grasp.
the only safe and consistent response to the cancel mob is to refuse any of their demands.
I wonder what precisely is your definition of "the cancel mob"?
(1) "cancel mob" is anyone who says that RMS shouldn't be in a leadership position (2) there are some reasonable people who say RMS shouldn't be in a leadership position and it's fine to listen to them, but other people who say that RMS shouldn't be in a leadership position and they're the cancel mob and we should ignore them (3) "cancel mob" is anyone who thinks that no actions short of illegal ones should disqualify someone from leadership posit
At some point the people running a project need to decide who they want to include and who they want to exclude.
They did. After his resignation, they apparently realized that allowing him to go was a mistake. So now he's back. They have decided.
This has really annoyed the woke progressives, because it calls into question their ability to infiltrate and dominate organizations through sheer intimidation. I hope and trust that the FSF will stay true to this decision, and keep Stallman despite external pressure.
Organizations like OSI that have condemned his return? I do believe we have found a way to identify which organizations have already been infiltrated.
Most of the people that built society were complete creeps or assholes that nobody wanted anything to do with. That doesn't mean that their success should afford them to get away with whatever they want but the people who tend to be successful aren't usually the same people worried about being liked by everyone.
and refuses to listen to feedback as to why his behaviour is unpleasant
Unpleasant to whom? Everyone? Or a small group of very vocal people with very focused
I'm not sure you should be accusing people of not being functioning if you can't tell the difference between deciding not to associate with someone and joining a mob calling for someone's professional career to be ended without so much as even a claim they did something illegal let alone a trial.
186,000 Miles per Second. It's not just a good idea. IT'S THE LAW.
I'm so torn (Score:5, Interesting)
On one hand, I think Stallman cannot lead effectively under these conditions, and given the long history of accusations.
On the other hand, Debian governance gave us systemd.
On the gripping hand, if the OSI says they won't work with the FSF while Stallman is around, that's a huge bonus. Fuck those fraudulent fucks.
Re: (Score:0, Flamebait)
On one hand, I think Stallman cannot lead effectively under these conditions, and given the long history of accusations.
Only because people like you keep spouting this crap. The 'has become a distraction' argument has become nothing more than bland cover for cowards who won't stand up to cancel culture but also don't agree.
"Cancelers" need to be called out for the shit-stains they actually are. Cowards are who they are, personal I just make note of them for future awareness that they can't be depended on.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Only because people like you keep spouting this crap.
It's actually because people keep making claims of harassment against him, but way to marginalize them.
The 'has become a distraction' argument has become nothing more than bland cover for cowards who won't stand up to cancel culture but also don't agree.
I don't stand up to cancel culture because I am not opposed to cancel culture. Conservacucks have no right to stand up to cancel culture because they invented cancel culture. I am not a coward, and I do agree. Lots of things should be cancelled.
"Cancelers" need to be called out for the shit-stains they actually are.
Conservatives cancelled alcohol and drugs. They tried to cancel heavy metal and dungeons and dragons. They cancelled thousands of black people with nooses. Now they
Re: (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree, some cancel culture is in order. People like yourself for instance... ;)
Seriously, no, no and a thousand times no! You do not get to talk about marginalizing accusations. Because accusations without a proper hearing before a judge are and will forever remain just some people throwing niceties at someone else they don't like.
Given how much it is en vogue to accuse anyone whose name is known to more than five people of misconduct, an accusation is worth NOTHING!
Obviously it must be investigated prope
Re:I'm so torn (Score:5, Insightful)
I see in another comment you describe yourself as a high functioning aspergers. I think you are slightly less high functioning than you imagine.
The bit you're missing here is that someone can act very unpleasantly, and make people not want to have anything to do with them, but for their behaviour to not be criminal offence.
Stallman has repeatedly done stuff that makes people not want to have anything to do with him. He's been told specific parts of his behaviour are unpleasant. He, like you, thinks that if he isn't breaking a law, he's allowed to continue that behaviour. He can, but at the same time, that means that some people don't want anything to do with him.
At some point the people running a project need to decide who they want to include and who they want to exclude.
Should they keep a guy who is a creep, and refuses to listen to feedback as to why his behaviour is unpleasant, or do they want to keep everyone else who doesn't want to have anything to do with him?
Re:I'm so torn (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
the only safe and consistent response to the cancel mob is to refuse any of their demands.
I wonder what precisely is your definition of "the cancel mob"?
(1) "cancel mob" is anyone who says that RMS shouldn't be in a leadership position
(2) there are some reasonable people who say RMS shouldn't be in a leadership position and it's fine to listen to them, but other people who say that RMS shouldn't be in a leadership position and they're the cancel mob and we should ignore them
(3) "cancel mob" is anyone who thinks that no actions short of illegal ones should disqualify someone from leadership posit
Re:I'm so torn (Score:5, Insightful)
At some point the people running a project need to decide who they want to include and who they want to exclude.
They did. After his resignation, they apparently realized that allowing him to go was a mistake. So now he's back. They have decided.
This has really annoyed the woke progressives, because it calls into question their ability to infiltrate and dominate organizations through sheer intimidation. I hope and trust that the FSF will stay true to this decision, and keep Stallman despite external pressure.
Organizations like OSI that have condemned his return? I do believe we have found a way to identify which organizations have already been infiltrated.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the people that built society were complete creeps or assholes that nobody wanted anything to do with. That doesn't mean that their success should afford them to get away with whatever they want but the people who tend to be successful aren't usually the same people worried about being liked by everyone.
Unpleasant to whom? Everyone? Or a small group of very vocal people with very focused
Re: (Score:2)