Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Joint Statement on the GNU Project

guix.gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 310 posts

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#241

Post by jlokier »

68plus57equals5 wrote: post #217
Jasper_ wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stallman's behavior has been known to the community for a long time. He's been banned from multiple free software conferences that I've visited for his behavior; the first one of such was 7 years ago. This isn't a new "witch hunt", it's been boiling forever, it's been known forever, but now the climate has changed enough that people are believing the allegations, and he's finally facing consequences for his actions.…

> He's been banned from multiple free software conferences that I've visited for his behavior; the first one of such was 7 years ago. Could you name at least couple of those conferences he was banned from? Preferably with surrounding circumstances?

I can't answer that question.

But this HN comment does a good job of describing events at a recentish conference, although not a banning:

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21186822
Although I'm a big fan of RMS's deeper works (as will be obvious from my other comment), it's easy to imagine him (or to be honest, anyone insufficiently skilled at public speaking) making terribly misguided (at best) "jokes" and the like about how few women there are in tech and implying something about finding sex and girlfriends etc., and these being understood in some literal way as actual requests for sex (probably incorrectly). Just like the poor-taste sexist humour in the lower-scoring comments on Slashdot, only carried into the public, verbal arena, where it's a really bad idea, and indeed, alienating and oppressive.

That sort of thing could get a person banned at a conference these days. (It would have been treated as humorous banter a few decades ago, and I find myself imagining that's when RMS learned his trade.) But usually there's some kind of escalation process, where people are told to stop doing it, and, if necessary, have it explained to them what is unacceptable and why.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#242

Post by virgilp »

joshuamorton wrote: post #225
virgilp wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that in this analogy, RMS is the one who invited them for dinner. You don't simply get to tell the host that "we don't like you but I think we'll keep meeting in your house for dinner.

So you're saying that RMS, is the sole owner of everything GNU? No. This is equivalent to a threat to strike. RMS without the GNU project maintainers is just a dude with a blog. And this approximates a vote of no confidence.

No - analogies are imperfect. But it's certainly a better analogy, RMS is not just a rude guest.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#243

Post by flukus »

shadowgovt wrote: post #77
golf2 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GNU has clearly outlived its usefulness putting social justice before free software.

These are not mutually exclusive ideas. In fact, they're complimentary if you turn your head and squint a bit; the Four Freedoms are targeted at minimizing the creation of a classist world where some people control software and others merely run it. Avoidance of a classist world is a "social justice" concept.

The current social justice movements believe in things like deplatforming, they don't have the conviction to defend Freedom #0.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#244

Post by virgilp »

codesections wrote: post #84
Smithalicious wrote: post #63

This statement makes clear to me that I can no longer trust (parts of) the GNU project to prioritize software freedom and making good software over catering to hateful lynchmobs and virtue signalling. There's no meaningful way for me to act on this current, since "boycotting" GNU does nothing to harm these bad elements and I do not contribute back to GNU. I can merely convey my profound disapproval. This is a disgrac…

> RMS is, in my view, a completely innocent man Note that the Joint Statement does not take a position on the statements that the most recent controversy has been about. Instead, it speaks about "behavior over the years"[0]. Of course, the recent controversy doubtless played a role in bringing all this to a head, but it is possible for someone to believe both that RMS is "completely innocent" of wrongful conduct and…

I could respect the signatories of the joint statement if thy sent it to RMS; Like this, what are they hoping to achieve? Ponder it for a second. They're calling for the lynch mob, they're disapointed that the lynch mob seems to have "stopped too soon". These are not people who honestly want to quit over principles... if they were, they'd send this in private to RMS. These are people who want RMS out for their own personal agenda (which they may even believe is the "common good" agenda... but, that's presumptuous on their part).

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#245

Post by jlokier »

simion314 wrote: post #208
shadowgovt wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on your goals and how much you trust the people you're communicating with (or the medium) to not turn your words against you. "I should always speak in an uncensored fashion" is, honestly, one of the poison memes of the modern internet. It's never been wise in any human interaction, and moving to the Internet didn't change that fact. It did, for a brief time (until de-anonymization and search caught up wit…

this sucks, Internet was supposed to be place where I can meet people and discuss different topics including some controversial ones,I am not talking about racism but more intellectual things like abortion, differences between male and female , gender topics. I may have an opinion on x and someone could make an argument and change my mind (in general most of us are ignorant and have a single point of view)

There are places on the internet where such things can be argued in a more intellectually supportive way. Just not all of the internet.

The internet is not just a place for meeting people and discussing opinions.

For many, many people, the internet is a socially supportive space, and an activity space, and those things don't work if challenging discussions are constantly taking place in them.

For what you've just asked for, specifically about making arguments that might change your mind, may I suggest you might enjoy: https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/ and https://changemyview.net/subreddit/ (I haven't used them myself, just read about them.)

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#246

Post by simion314 »

jlokier wrote: post #245
simion314 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this sucks, Internet was supposed to be place where I can meet people and discuss different topics including some controversial ones,I am not talking about racism but more intellectual things like abortion, differences between male and female , gender topics. I may have an opinion on x and someone could make an argument and change my mind (in general most of us are ignorant and have a single point of view)

There are places on the internet where such things can be argued in a more intellectually supportive way. Just not all of the internet. The internet is not just a place for meeting people and discussing opinions. For many, many people, the internet is a socially supportive space, and an activity space, and those things don't work if challenging discussions are constantly taking place in them. For what you've just ask…

I will check those reddits, though should people create a different account when going there?

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#247

Post by dang »

rowanG077 wrote: post #9

fuck the GNU project. I no longer can take it seriously after the events that have occurred. Disgusting bunch of people.

Please read and follow the HN guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. You may not owe the GNU project any better, but you owe the community better if you want to keep posting here.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#248

Post by enriquto »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #73

I personally think that Richard Stallman is both not getting fair treatment and to some extent brought this on himself. For me, the GNU project becomes much less interesting without his blog articles, public talks, etc. I had let my FSF membership lapse, was thinking of renewing, and now probably won’t. Off topic, but I enjoyed seeing the leaders of the various GNU projects listed in one place as signers of this lett…

> Off topic, but I enjoyed seeing the leaders of the various GNU projects listed in one place as signers of this letter. I don’t agree with them but it is good to see their names and projects listed.

Notice that for most of the big projects, it is not the leader name that appears on that list, but only a particular developer.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#249

Post by jlokier »

simion314 wrote: post #246
jlokier wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are places on the internet where such things can be argued in a more intellectually supportive way. Just not all of the internet. The internet is not just a place for meeting people and discussing opinions. For many, many people, the internet is a socially supportive space, and an activity space, and those things don't work if challenging discussions are constantly taking place in them. For what you've just ask…

I will check those reddits, though should people create a different account when going there?

I haven't used those reddits, and I don't have a reddit account anyway.

I think the fact it occurred to you to ask, suggests an answer. If you would feel safer testing the water with a different account, then I'd recommend you do that.

People have an annoying habit of attributing expressed thoughts to a person long after the person has openly changed their mind, as well as misunderstanding the intended meaning of a stated view anyway. Same if the person was just constructing an argument for the purpose of thinking things through (for example as in devil's advocate).

Personally, I would also recommend a "listen first" approach.

Re: Joint Statement on the GNU Project

#250

Post by zenexer »

throwanem wrote: post #232
falcolas wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless I'm dramatically misreading all the various articles, only a few women that were directly approached by Stallman for a romantic encounter felt discouraged. This did not impact a vast majority of the women who have, and do, contribute to GNU projects. Yeah, he fucked up in approaching those women and making them uncomfortable. However, a couple of data points do not a trend make.

Yes, you are dramatically misreading the situation. I've been in attendance at an RMS talk (HOPE 2016) when he opened by asking the organizers to turn the house lights back up so he could see if there was anyone in the crowd he might want to have sex with. I saw how many women immediately got up and left in response to that, and I don't blame them for doing so. I would've done the same, if I'd felt myself to be one o…

This is a pivotal piece of information. I’ve been following the recent RMS developments fairly closely, but I was entirely unaware that he was pulling this sort of nonsense. I was under the impression all the fuss was over a philosophical yet taboo series of statements he made in regards to human trafficking and pedophilia.

Why am I not hearing about these encounters? These are the voices I want to hear. Why have these stories gained no traction until now? Why does it take a scandal to bring these issues to light? Am I just living under a rock, or is there an overarching issue with OSS culture that extends far beyond Stallman? I’m incredibly disappointed that I’m only discovering this deep in HN comments.

Post reply on HN