Joint Statement on the GNU Project • Hacker News Board

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#151

Post by dtornabene » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:08 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #95

kennywinker wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I come to your house for dinner, and am an asshole to you and your family, do we need to get the law involved or should you just not invite me over for dinner again?

Perhaps I pull you aside, call you out for your actions, and give you the chance to change your ways. One strike and your out isn't even how we play baseball.

yeah, the only way this makes sense is if you slide right past the "multiple conferences" part in the comment rooting this thread( which, apparently, you are). And of course also the "multiple women have come forward" part in the statements online. The mental gymnastics here to justify this is awe inspiring.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#152

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:08 PM UTC

rowanG077 wrote: post #149

dragonwriter wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't show respect to people that throw their leader under the bus at the first sign of trouble. If they had done that, Stallman would have been gone decades ago.

Which would have been fine. It's not fine that this happens when external pressure due to the media is happening.

I don't think a problem escalating to mass media attention makes it less appropriate to deal with it.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#153

Post by bepvte » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:09 PM UTC

blub wrote: post #113

dtornabene wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the ability for women to be able to contribute and simply be a part of the free software community without harrassment does not fall under "no real bearing on the project", just so we're clear here.

Women will never "be able to contribute and simply be part of the free software community without harassment", because any online community is a reflection of society at large, which is becoming more fragmented, agressive and embittered. Did female harassment get solved in society at large? No. You can't solve it in online communities, you're only building bubbles of false-safety which will pop once the pressure from…

How would you solve harassment then? If you dont believe in small changes in smaller communities, do you believe that change has to occur in all of society at once?

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#154

Post by dtornabene » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:10 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #103

jordigh wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are lots of us who care. We can preserve software freedom with the same stubborn, uncompromising attitude without having to also alienate the very people we wish to help.

Question then. Why has it taken the airing Stallman's dirty laundry to step forward? What has stopped you (that is, the "we" and "us" from your statement) from standing out on your own merits before now?

I'm going to go with: So women can participate without having to be asked out on dates? So they don't feel harassed? You want to run cover for people do it in your own org man. This is beyond obtuse.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#155

Post by kennywinker » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:10 PM UTC

rowanG077 wrote: post #140

kennywinker wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I should have said "writing off" not "throwing away"

Me writing off a bunch of people that are mostly unrelated to me and a group of people expel their leader are vastly different things. There is(should be) an inherit trust from the leader to the group and the group to the leader. It's fine for the group to expel. What is not fine in my opinion is for the group to do this under external pressure. This clearly show the group has no allegiance to the group itself. Only…

Apparently some other non serious groups include: governments, most major corporations.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#156

Post by tssva » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:11 PM UTC

blub wrote: post #99

shadowgovt wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's your concern, I recommend reading up further on people's issues with rms. It's not "some accusations that appeared after 20 years," it's 30 years of pattern. https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendi...

Utterly destroying a person's reputation should come with a damn high burden of proof. That article would be laughed out of any courtroom. Reading that has been a complete waste of time. To save everyone else some effort: 1. The man has problematic opinions. Welcome to democracy, where people with uncomfortable opinions are free to hold and discuss them. This is healthy. 2. He used a bad pick-up line, saying he'll ki…

  1. The man has problematic opinions. Welcome to
  democracy, where people with uncomfortable opinions are
  free to hold and discuss them. This is healthy.

People are free to hold and discuss them but others are just as free to exercise their democratic right of free association by choosing not to associate with you because of them.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#157

Post by falcolas » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:12 PM UTC

dtornabene wrote: post #154

falcolas wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question then. Why has it taken the airing Stallman's dirty laundry to step forward? What has stopped you (that is, the "we" and "us" from your statement) from standing out on your own merits before now?

I'm going to go with: So women can participate without having to be asked out on dates? So they don't feel harassed? You want to run cover for people do it in your own org man. This is beyond obtuse.

This answer has nothing to do with the questions I proposed. I'm asking why these people who proclaim to be as good as or better than Stallman are only now stepping up.

What Stallman's dirty laundry is has been thoroughly discussed.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#158

Post by dtornabene » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:13 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #142

dtornabene wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how you're getting any kind of round statistics here. especially since its well known that most people who suffer harassment never report it, never say anything, for precisely the reasons being demonstrated on this thread today. And that was only one of the things wrong with that post, another being: people who choose to take a stand on harassment are somehow going to be mediocrities compared to stallman…

So, statistics. Allow me to fabricate a few number using some well known ballparking methods. In November of 2010, 4,600 people contributed to GNU. If we follow the 1-9-90 rule of speaking out, for every 1 woman who went to the authorities, 9 women have spoken out publicly, and, 90 others have not. I'm aware of 6-7 who have gone public with their accusations, and none who went to the authorities. As such, it seems sa…

good to know that you're cool with harassment if it doesn't cross a certain numerical threshold. Clarifying.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#159

Post by t0astbread » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

sprash wrote: post #141

Many people here talk about "cancel culture" which is in fact a fake culture that is completely artificially generated via paid actors, like some on this list of signatures. Most of the people taking part in the character assasination plot against Stallman running right now work in fact for Saleaforce, IBM or some other FAANG type of organization. You can look it up by yourself. Stallman is a very eccentric person wh…

> Most of the people taking part in the character assasination plot against Stallman running right now work in fact for Saleaforce, IBM or some other FAANG type of organization

Maybe those corporations do a better job at providing an inclusive environment than the free software community? And those people are interested in bringing the same to the FS world. (Whether or not it was necessary to push Stallman out for that, I'm not sure.)

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#160

Post by dtornabene » Mon, Oct 07, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

choeger wrote: post #75

badrequest wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've whipped up quite a strawman to get angry at, do you have any proof of this conspiracy?

Well he is empirically right about the code of conducts, the public attacks on free software figures, and the denial of free speech. I would call it typical radical leftist behavior instead of a conspiracy, but everything else checks out. You, for instance, mentioned above that it would be impossible for a minor to engage in consensual sexual behavior without even considering for a moment that there are more liberal…

iTs NoT pEdoPhIlLiA, iTs EbEoPhIlIa!!!

glad to see my other comment on this was flagged! keep supporting this insanity orange site, you're doing great.