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

41–50 of 139 posts

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#41

Post by yarcob »

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.

I'm personally not a fan of Stallman (I don't agree with many of his positions), but I really don't think we should judge him based on a few stupid comments that he made on a mailing list based on limited information about a controversial topic.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#42

Post by danpalmer »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #31
danpalmer wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Alas, cancellation is binary. It's akin to bullying: once started things begin to go downhill really quick. There are always enough people willing to raise there self-esteem by kicking a dead lion.

I disagree that it's binary. Brendan Eich seems to be doing pretty well running Brave after being "cancelled" for donating for anti-gay-marriage causes. I think people remember that but have mostly let him get on with his life because he a) apologised, and b) no longer runs something as visible as Mozilla.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#43

Post by Splendor »

yarcob wrote: post #41
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.

I'm personally not a fan of Stallman (I don't agree with many of his positions), but I really don't think we should judge him based on a few stupid comments that he made on a mailing list based on limited information about a controversial topic.

Can we judge him based on how he responds to criticism of those stupid comments?

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#44

Post by brobdingnagians »

danpalmer wrote: post #28
crazypython wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://stallmansupport.org/

This website does not acknowledge the harm he has done to the free software movement and therefore cannot heal any issues that he has caused. If he made a sincere apology things might be different, but as long as he and his supporters refuse to engage with criticism they won't reach a resolution.

Engaging with criticism is different than bowing to pressure (and I think he is engaging, just not in the way his detractors want). You can be nice, but you still have to stand strong on your principles. I don't like a lot of the stuff RMS says and think a lot of it is downright disgraceful, and I'm mostly indifferent to his cause, but I think he has a right to disagree with his detractors. I'd rather defend the rights of the people I disagree with, than to wake up one day without rights myself.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#45

Post by tsimionescu »

throwaway8581 wrote: post #24
newacct583 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Who cares what he thinks about Minsky paying for sex? It’s hard to imagine something less relevant to his job.

His job is entirely ideological, so his ideology receives due scrutiny, even if this were an entirely unrelated field.

But, given that Minsky is a significant name in the compiter science communities, and that Stallman continues to deny that Minsky's behavior (having sex with a 17 year-old unwilling sex worker while he was 70? 80?, even though he may have thought she was an 18-year old willinh sex worker) is not emtorely unrelated to questions of women's treatment in the computer science and opem source community.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#46

Post by not_again1234 »

sthomas1618 wrote: post #6
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…

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.

Spoken like a toxic person. There are many ways to be toxic in a team, and most of them are tolerated and encouraged by the moral guardians.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#48

Post by seoaeu »

ashtonkem wrote: post #19
newacct583 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 mas…

Yeah, when your role has a large public relations component, botching things this badly really undermines undermines the argument that you're the best person for the job.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#49

Post by danpalmer »

brobdingnagians wrote: post #44
danpalmer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This website does not acknowledge the harm he has done to the free software movement and therefore cannot heal any issues that he has caused. If he made a sincere apology things might be different, but as long as he and his supporters refuse to engage with criticism they won't reach a resolution.

Engaging with criticism is different than bowing to pressure (and I think he is engaging, just not in the way his detractors want). You can be nice, but you still have to stand strong on your principles. I don't like a lot of the stuff RMS says and think a lot of it is downright disgraceful, and I'm mostly indifferent to his cause, but I think he has a right to disagree with his detractors. I'd rather defend the righ…

I see your point, although I'd suggest that there's a difference between changing the conversation and ignoring the conversation.

I think RMS is ignoring the claims of toxic behaviour and/or claiming them to be fake news, rather than, say, owning and apologising or showing why those claims are wrong.

Re: Statement of FSF board on election of Richard Stallman

#50

Post by ashtonkem »

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...

What exactly does he bring to the table, other than creating drama? What is the FSF doing these days? Because literally all I see it doing is trying to clean up after RMS' messes.
Post reply on HN