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

Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

vote.debian.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 123 posts

Re: Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

#11

Post by Pfhreak »

CameronNemo wrote: post #7
Pfhreak wrote: post #6

If you look at the results they link, the picture becomes clearer. They proposed 8 options. 2 directly called for resignations at FSF, 2 directly supported RMS, one said to stop working with FSF, one said to call for governance improvements at FSF, one was no comment, and one was discuss further. The two options in support of RMS were not majority held opinions, and were held by ~1/6-1/3 of voters. No comment beat "c…

> 2/3+ of voters in Debian supported calling for RMSs removal How did you come to that number?

Look at the row for option 2 in the data table, it will show you how many people preferred that option over other options. Roughly two thirds preferred removing RMS over "we should talk about this further", for example.

Re: Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

#13

Post by cbmuser »

Pfhreak wrote: post #6

If you look at the results they link, the picture becomes clearer. They proposed 8 options. 2 directly called for resignations at FSF, 2 directly supported RMS, one said to stop working with FSF, one said to call for governance improvements at FSF, one was no comment, and one was discuss further. The two options in support of RMS were not majority held opinions, and were held by ~1/6-1/3 of voters. No comment beat "c…

> Debian will issue no comment, 2/3+ of voters in Debian supported calling for RMSs removal. It's clear which way the tide is moving, even if Debian says nothing.

FWIW, some people didn’t want to vote because the results would be publicly with names.

So the result of a secret vote might have been different.

Re: Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

#14

Post by zozbot234 »

Pfhreak wrote: post #6

If you look at the results they link, the picture becomes clearer. They proposed 8 options. 2 directly called for resignations at FSF, 2 directly supported RMS, one said to stop working with FSF, one said to call for governance improvements at FSF, one was no comment, and one was discuss further. The two options in support of RMS were not majority held opinions, and were held by ~1/6-1/3 of voters. No comment beat "c…

To clarify, 2/3 supported calling for removal over calling for RMS to stay, or "Further discussion". The option to not comment was clearly preferred over others, it was the only choice in the Schwarz set. There is no ambiguity at all about the outcome.

Re: Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

#15

Post by zamalek »

umvi wrote: post #12

Can someone fill me in on the RMS drama/politics? Is this because he was cancelled due to (supposedly) defending Epstein and he's now trying to uncancel himself?

He continues to do intolerant stuff: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix

Re: Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

#16

Post by arendtio »

madars wrote: post #4
nextaccountic wrote: post #2

What does this graph means?

Debian uses the Condorcet method for elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method . Each voter is to rank a subset of all options, and this is the resulting pairwise preference graph.

Thanks, that explains a lot.

I was kinda confused by the complexity of the results, but if it is about ranks, it all makes sense now :-)

Re: Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

#17

Post by Pfhreak »

umvi wrote: post #12

Can someone fill me in on the RMS drama/politics? Is this because he was cancelled due to (supposedly) defending Epstein and he's now trying to uncancel himself?

Here's the letter that details the concerns about RMS: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix

It's significantly more detailed and complex than "allegedly defending Epstein".

Here's the letter supporting RMS: https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Re: Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

#18

Post by tedunangst »

cbmuser wrote: post #13
Pfhreak wrote: post #6

If you look at the results they link, the picture becomes clearer. They proposed 8 options. 2 directly called for resignations at FSF, 2 directly supported RMS, one said to stop working with FSF, one said to call for governance improvements at FSF, one was no comment, and one was discuss further. The two options in support of RMS were not majority held opinions, and were held by ~1/6-1/3 of voters. No comment beat "c…

> Debian will issue no comment, 2/3+ of voters in Debian supported calling for RMSs removal. It's clear which way the tide is moving, even if Debian says nothing. FWIW, some people didn’t want to vote because the results would be publicly with names. So the result of a secret vote might have been different.

They should have gated this vote with a yes/no vote on whether to vote.

Re: Debian votes to make no statement regarding RMS readmission to the FSF board

#19

Post by Pfhreak »

zozbot234 wrote: post #14
Pfhreak wrote: post #6

If you look at the results they link, the picture becomes clearer. They proposed 8 options. 2 directly called for resignations at FSF, 2 directly supported RMS, one said to stop working with FSF, one said to call for governance improvements at FSF, one was no comment, and one was discuss further. The two options in support of RMS were not majority held opinions, and were held by ~1/6-1/3 of voters. No comment beat "c…

To clarify, 2/3 supported calling for removal over calling for RMS to stay, or "Further discussion". The option to not comment was clearly preferred over others, it was the only choice in the Schwarz set. There is no ambiguity at all about the outcome.

I didn't imply there is ambiguity in the result. But there is a difference between "what we agree on as a whole community" and what the majority opinion is.

The community agreed on no comment, full stop.

A significant preference was also shown for removal over reinstatement.

Post reply on HN