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

Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

fsf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 139 posts

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#11

Post by na85 »

underseacables wrote: post #3

That is a really well written statement in my humble opinion. It’s almost like they’re trying to tell people “look we need this guy, and yeah for many it sucks, but for the betterment of the mission and the future of free software, we have to come together because he is simply too valuable to ignore“ I was intrigued at “ The announcement by RMS at LibrePlanet was a complete surprise to staff, all those who worked so…

>look we need this guy, and yeah for many it sucks, but for the betterment of the mission and the future of free software, we have to come together because he is simply too valuable to ignore

But he's not valuable any more, that's the thing. He hasn't written code in like 30 years and to the best of my knowledge all he does is go around giving the same tired lecture over and over.

This pretend apology does nothing to address the very real concerns expressed by the people who have had to work with RMS. The guy is just generally an asshole, with the charisma of a wet towel.

We give some assholes some slack if they continue to make valuable contributions (Torvalds, de Raadt), but RMS makes no valuable contributions.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#12

Post by newacct583 »

danpalmer wrote: post #4

> He has sincere regrets, especially at how anger toward him personally has negatively impacted the reputation and mission of FSF In my opinion, "I'm sorry you were offended enough to stop supporting me" is not a sincere apology. In fact this whole announcement is one big "I'm sorry you were offended" statement. It doesn't apologise for the problem, it "apologises" for not managing to sneak the announcements past peo…

Which is frustrating, because this really should be a circumstance where a genuinely sincere apology should be... acceptable. RMS isn't accused of trafficking here, after all. He jumped in to a heated discussion to defend Minsky (one of his heroes[1] who had been fingered as a john in the Epstein affair). And in the process he deployed a line of argument[2] that probably sounded reasonable to a spectrum personality working in an nearly-all-male tech environment but that REALLY grates to modern ears in a more cosmopolitan world.

All that needed to happen was RMS coming out with something along the lines "I'm sorry. I let criticism of my hero cloud my judgement and found myself defending something that shouldn't ever be defended. I should have known better, and know now how much rhetoric like this hurts people. Please forgive me." And that really should have been enough for a community consensus to form around forgiveness. This isn't a Bill Cosby situation, at all.

But... I guess he wouldn't. And the FSF couldn't or didn't want to make him. Which is deeply frustrating.

[1] And mine, FWIW.

[2] To wit: "Engaging with extremely young, presumptively-trafficked prostitutes isn't TECHNICALLY assault". It's... logically arguable, but in context it ends up defending a practice we've all finally decided to abhor.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#13

Post by danpalmer »

semitones wrote: post #10
sthomas1618 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not disagree more. This whole statement is "sorry, not sorry". If someone is known to be a toxic person (and currently still is), you do not let them on to your team. Ever.

Toxicity isn't a binary thing - there's levels to it. If the benefits one can bring to a team outweigh their negative attributes, then you should let them on your team. As far as how to determine whether the good outweighs the bad, that's a different topic. He brings a lot to the table, and I don't think he should have his work and life "cancelled" because some people disagree with his opinions...

Cancellation isn't a binary thing either, and I'm not sure anyone is suggesting that RMS's past contributions to the FSF be dismantled or that no one should employ him, I don't think anyone seriously want's to cancel his life's work.

The suggestions are that he shouldn't hold a leadership position in a community when he's shown an inability to lead a community safely.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#14

Post by semitones »

Splendor wrote: post #5

> He has sincere regrets, especially at how anger toward him personally has negatively impacted the reputation and mission of FSF. This line really misses the mark for me. When you defend a man who raped a 17 year-old girl, your biggest regret shouldn't be about how it harmed your reputation.

This is the point that RMS is trying to make. His argument (iirc) is that "rape" might be an incorrect word used to describe what happened (was it proved to be rape? The only part proved iirc were the ages), and that immediately because the person was 17 instead of 18, that word is used to describe the situation without second thought. I don't think he was saying that there should be zero repercussions, or that we should forget all about it, or that we should condone relations with minors... Just saying, when I was 17, I was well mature enough to make my own choices and to be aware of my actions. There's a HUGE difference between 17/18 and 14/15. I think this is the point he was trying to make.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#15

Post by azinman2 »

Splendor wrote: post #5

> He has sincere regrets, especially at how anger toward him personally has negatively impacted the reputation and mission of FSF. This line really misses the mark for me. When you defend a man who raped a 17 year-old girl, your biggest regret shouldn't be about how it harmed your reputation.

His point was that we don’t know that Minsky raped anyone from Minsky’s perspective. Go read his actual words again.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#16

Post by pieter_mj »

DasIch wrote: post #9
underseacables wrote: post #3

That is a really well written statement in my humble opinion. It’s almost like they’re trying to tell people “look we need this guy, and yeah for many it sucks, but for the betterment of the mission and the future of free software, we have to come together because he is simply too valuable to ignore“ I was intrigued at “ The announcement by RMS at LibrePlanet was a complete surprise to staff, all those who worked so…

What if, RMS is hit by a bus tomorrow? The FSF is not a new organization. That it cannot function without RMS means it's failing to stand on its own. That may be acceptable for a new organization but in case of the FSF that's just a massive failure to build a sustainable organization. If you care about the work the FSF is doing (I don't), this announcement should be extremely worrying.

>this announcement should be extremely worrying.

I agree it's slightly worrying, there's currently no replacement for RMS. The libre software movement risks falling apart if he is no longer there. FSF and RMS should make quick work of finding someone valuable.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#17

Post by danpalmer »

newacct583 wrote: post #12
danpalmer wrote: post #4

> He has sincere regrets, especially at how anger toward him personally has negatively impacted the reputation and mission of FSF In my opinion, "I'm sorry you were offended enough to stop supporting me" is not a sincere apology. In fact this whole announcement is one big "I'm sorry you were offended" statement. It doesn't apologise for the problem, it "apologises" for not managing to sneak the announcements past peo…

Which is frustrating, because this really should be a circumstance where a genuinely sincere apology should be... acceptable. RMS isn't accused of trafficking here, after all. He jumped in to a heated discussion to defend Minsky (one of his heroes[1] who had been fingered as a john in the Epstein affair). And in the process he deployed a line of argument[2] that probably sounded reasonable to a spectrum personality w…

I agree in principle. I think someone in RMS's postition could have apologised far better and been more effective at changing their behaviour. However I'm not sure that RMS himself could do this and at this point I think it's probably too late for the FSF to get him back without backlash because it has gone too far.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#18

Post by burnte »

I read this and RMS's statement. I've been saying Stallman needs to go for adecade or more, I believe his fanaticism holds back the organization and movement.

However, after reading his statement, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt IF he not only sees now that he's been ofensive, but is more willing to listen to criticism in the future. If he TRULY recognizes he's got social issues and communication problems, then he MUST be more willing to give and take, and not be so rigid. I can truly believe he didn't understand the allegations against Minsky because I truly believe RMS frequently takes stances on issues where he has minimal knowledge of the facts.

The problem is I don't see that concession in his apology or the FSF statement. I think this is preobably a bad move. I think RMS is not only not-irreplaceble, I think there people who could be much more effective in that role.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#19

Post by ashtonkem »

newacct583 wrote: post #12
danpalmer wrote: post #4

> He has sincere regrets, especially at how anger toward him personally has negatively impacted the reputation and mission of FSF In my opinion, "I'm sorry you were offended enough to stop supporting me" is not a sincere apology. In fact this whole announcement is one big "I'm sorry you were offended" statement. It doesn't apologise for the problem, it "apologises" for not managing to sneak the announcements past peo…

Which is frustrating, because this really should be a circumstance where a genuinely sincere apology should be... acceptable. RMS isn't accused of trafficking here, after all. He jumped in to a heated discussion to defend Minsky (one of his heroes[1] who had been fingered as a john in the Epstein affair). And in the process he deployed a line of argument[2] that probably sounded reasonable to a spectrum personality w…

Honestly, the fact that a quick apology would have solved this entire problem is the main reason why I think he should go away. The entire situation reeks of extremely poor judgement on his part and the FSF's board, and to my eye seems emblematic of the poor leadership that he and the board have displayed for most of my lifetime.

Or more succinctly; if you manage to turn a minor snafu worthy of one apology into a massive scandal that's splitting up your org, maybe you shouldn't be in charge?

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#20

Post by Mordisquitos »

Splendor wrote: post #5

> He has sincere regrets, especially at how anger toward him personally has negatively impacted the reputation and mission of FSF. This line really misses the mark for me. When you defend a man who raped a 17 year-old girl, your biggest regret shouldn't be about how it harmed your reputation.

You seem to have pasted the wrong quote. That one doesn't say that his biggest regret is how it harmed his reputation. Rather, it says that he is especially regretful at how it harmed the Free Software Foundation's reputation.
Post reply on HN