John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation • Hacker News Board

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#171

Post by birracerveza » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:12 AM UTC

clappski wrote: post #16

risky_opinions wrote: post #9

I'm creating a throwaway that I hope won't irk dang. If this breaks the rules, I'm sorry and I'll stop. Richard Stallman single-handedly created the free software movement, and he's the reason we all have jobs. Google and Facebook might not have been possible in a world where you couldn't spin up a server for free and compile code without paying a license. Richard Stallman has said some sexist and edgy things. He als…

> I don't want to live in a world without American freedom of speech - where we can't be blunt and speak our minds. Freedom of speech isn't the freedom to not be publicly judged about what you say.

>Freedom of speech isn't the freedom to not be publicly judged about what you say.

This is not just about being judged, it's about being judged and executed for your opinions. The judges and the juries have already handed out their verdict and will personally hand out the punishment, and if you dare question it you'll likely be next on the list. For example, I've seen that those who sided against RMS create a script to block those who signed the petition in his support. It's infuriating, it's a childish behavior that doesn't help anyone, it serves only to further polarize and radicalize the two sides, and further reduces the room for discussion. If there even was room left, that is. [1]

This is not an ecosystem where people are able to express their ideas. There is either black or white. You are either with us or against us. And if you express moderate opinions you risk angering both sides, and good luck with that.

You have to carefully weight every single word, because all it takes is for a single person to take issue with your comment enough to signal it to the cancel culture mob on Twitter to mobilize a horde of vocal complainers with plenty of spare time that will do everything they can to make you regret ever typing it out, either now or in the future. It's outright barbaric behavior from both sides that has been seen time and time again in the last years.

Do you honestly consider this "freedom of speech"?

---

[1] As another commenter points out, this kind of stuff comes from both sides. The given example was just fresh in my mind.

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#172

Post by 2pEXgD0fZ5cF » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:12 AM UTC

bitwize wrote: post #120

2pEXgD0fZ5cF wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't comment on most of the accusations, I have never met rms in person. But what really shocked me was that the authors of the anti rms letter label him as "transphobe", as a source for that claim they link to his GNU Kind Communications Guidelines [1], which to me spell the exact opposite. Why put such a claim in there? I find it really disturbing that so many people willingly accept that it's ok to mix legitima…

It's the bit about singular "they". RMS for some reason doesn't like singular "they", despite the fact that it predates singular "you" in common English usage. Singular "they" also happens to be, by far, the preferred pronoun of nonbinary people. By telling people not to use singular "they", RMS is harming, offending, and driving away nonbinary people from participation in GNU projects.

In the linked guidelines it says the following:

> Honoring people's preferences about gender identity includes not referring to them in ways that conflict with that identity. For instance, not to use pronouns for them that conflict with it.

> There are several ways to avoid that; one way is to use gender-neutral pronouns, since they don't conflict with any possible gender identity.

> One choice is singular use of “they,” “them” and “their.”

> Another choice uses the gender-neutral singular pronouns, “person,” “per” and “pers,” which are used in Information for Maintainers of GNU Software.

> Other gender-neutral pronouns have also been used in English.

I'm genuinely trying to understand this. That does not spell a strong opposition to the supposedly preferred use of "they". But even then, does that really warrant the label "transphobe"?

Is that all it takes to qualify as a transphobe person, despite all the other points?

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#173

Post by orra » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:13 AM UTC

smt88 wrote: post #45

Number157 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's for good reason. He displays the symptoms so he probably has it, regardless of what he says.

You can't diagnose someone else on the autism spectrum. Applying your bullshit armchair psychology to strangers is harmful to people who actually are on the spectrum. My sister has Asperger's and is easily able to understand why children can't consent to sex and that it doesn't hurt anyone to use preferred pronouns. I don't see what Asperger's has to do with the issues RSM was/is ignorant about.

> My sister has Asperger's and is easily able to understand [...]. I don't see what Asperger's has to do with the issues RSM was/is ignorant about.

Exactly. And regardless, his (willful) non-understanding makes him a terrible leader, a terrible spokesperson.

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#174

Post by andrewaylett » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:13 AM UTC

risky_opinions wrote: post #9

I'm creating a throwaway that I hope won't irk dang. If this breaks the rules, I'm sorry and I'll stop. Richard Stallman single-handedly created the free software movement, and he's the reason we all have jobs. Google and Facebook might not have been possible in a world where you couldn't spin up a server for free and compile code without paying a license. Richard Stallman has said some sexist and edgy things. He als…

Stallman has shown that he's a man of his principles, and willing to stick by them even at great personal cost.

Obviously he's most famous for his dedication to Free Software. But in recent years, he's made it very clear that Free Software isn't actually the most important principle in his life: his freedom to act abusively is more important.

When Stallman was asked to choose between Free Software and abusive behaviour, he chose abusive behaviour. And what we're seeing now is the fallout from the decision he made. It's cost him a lot, yes, but that's his choice. Would that it were less costly for those who have suffered at his hands.

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#175

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:14 AM UTC

bitwize wrote: post #132

simion314 wrote: post #55

We almost Linus Torwalds because of the cancel culture, would be a big loss to lose RMS because he is no longer good PR to have him, bonus points if some big business like Google or Red Hat could grab the leadership of FSF and GNU. There was a few days back a post for people to support RMS and I admit I did not put my name on the list because i am afraid this could affect my future, cancel culture could get worse and…

Linus was confronted with his toxic behavior by peers and apologized. That is the only reason why we didn't "lose" him, or rather, he was allowed to stay. It's high time the open source community cleaned house and made itself unwelcome to assholes.

[deleted]

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#176

Post by Qwertious » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:14 AM UTC

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #40

rich_sasha wrote: post #8

A whole different angle, I wonder how well the FSF folk get on with RMS. For all the defenses people mount of him, no one says he's a nice guy to be around. I'm still against the Twitter mob etc., I do wonder though if RMS nuked his own organisation by joining the helm again. Life's unfair.

It does not matter if rms is a nice person or not. He didn't do anything criminal, his only offense is stoically and pedantically expressing his views, unyielding to public pressure. In other words, displaying those very qualities that helped him change software development forever. People should not be destroyed for not being nice enough to certain individuals prone to offenses, and conforming to someone else's view…

>It does not matter if rms is a nice person or not.

If it impacts his effectiveness in leading the FSF, then it absolutely does matter.

If he's abrasive, then nobody will want to work with him, and by extension people won't want to work with the FSF.

We shouldn't have to play this politically-correct bullshit game of tiptoe: Richard Stallman's social skills are shit, and saying that he's not well suited to a people-facing role is not some attack on him.

>conforming to someone else's views should not be a necessity to work in your chosen field.

It sounds like you don't know the difference between bootlicking and subtlety. While the face of the FSF being unyielding on Free Software is generally good, the face of the FSF being unyielding on,say, nosefucking with plants is less so.

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#177

Post by 2pEXgD0fZ5cF » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:15 AM UTC

orra wrote: post #153

2pEXgD0fZ5cF wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't comment on most of the accusations, I have never met rms in person. But what really shocked me was that the authors of the anti rms letter label him as "transphobe", as a source for that claim they link to his GNU Kind Communications Guidelines [1], which to me spell the exact opposite. Why put such a claim in there? I find it really disturbing that so many people willingly accept that it's ok to mix legitima…

The footnote of that policy allows you to persistently call a trans man "they", even if his preferred pronoun is he. That is, the policy endorses you misgendering. Calling a he/him person a "they" is a way of saying that you don't think they're a real man. It's really not much better than calling a trans man "her". Finally, the previous version of the said guidelines used to reject singular they. Singular they is a g…

Then what about the following part from the guidelines:

> Honoring people's preferences about gender identity includes not referring to them in ways that conflict with that identity. For instance, not to use pronouns for them that conflict with it.

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#178

Post by psychiatrist24 » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:15 AM UTC

mhh__ wrote: post #115

mhh__ wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Richard Stallman has said some sexist and edgy things. done some sexist and edgy things. On stage, spoken directly at women. Also, Stallman is a totally incompetent leader - the project is sufficiently niche that I won't name it, but the maintainer mentioned to me that he entered rms's bad book merely by virtue of having children.

C+P of a compelling list from the gcc mailing list I read: 1. 'skeptical that voluntarily pedophilia harms children.’ stallman's own archives 2006-mar-jun I note that children are incapable of consenting. That’s what the age of consent means. 2. 'end censorship of “child pornography”’. Stallman's archives 2012-jul-oct.html Notice use of “quotes” to down play what is actually being requested. 3. 'gentle expressions of…

Obviously the age of consent can be discussed, it even varies from country to country.

I don't understand the EMACS virgin joke?

I don't think asking women on dates is automatically "inappropriate behavior". How are men and women supposed to get together? Even in a "professional setting", because the feminist claim that it is demeaning to women if somebody is attracted to them is simply wrong.

I can't claim RMS is "ok", but I'd like to see better evidence against him. Some women disliking him is not enough, either.

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#179

Post by FpUser » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:15 AM UTC

kosinus wrote: post #19

risky_opinions wrote: post #9

I'm creating a throwaway that I hope won't irk dang. If this breaks the rules, I'm sorry and I'll stop. Richard Stallman single-handedly created the free software movement, and he's the reason we all have jobs. Google and Facebook might not have been possible in a world where you couldn't spin up a server for free and compile code without paying a license. Richard Stallman has said some sexist and edgy things. He als…

> American freedom of speech This specifically is such a weird expression. Other than that, just because Stallman did a good thing once, doesn’t excuse him from other mistakes. And making mistakes is not itself a problem, you can always own up to them and learn. But what I gather from the discussion is that there is a _pattern_ of bad behaviour.

>"...just because Stallman did a good thing once..."

This is one glaring trivialization. RMS had "once" spent decades of hard work from which we all benefit greatly.

Re: John Sullivan resign as executive director of the Free Software Foundation

#180

Post by Denvercoder9 » Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 10:15 AM UTC

toomim wrote: post #114

clappski wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't want to live in a world without American freedom of speech - where we can't be blunt and speak our minds. Freedom of speech isn't the freedom to not be publicly judged about what you say.

Freedom of speech is about the freedom to make political opinions while retaining your place in society as a citizen. None of the public judgements about RMS are about anything technical, anything about free software, or anything that touch on him running the FSF. He voiced an unfashionable opinion on sex and the laws about sex. This is a political act to blacklist a man for his political opinions from work in a prof…

> Freedom of speech is about the freedom to make political opinions while retaining your place in society as a citizen.

No, freedom of speech is about not being censored for expressing your opinions. It is not a right to be facilitated in expressing your opinions, or freedom of consequences for your opinions.