Re: Support RMS

[Danny Spitzberg <stationaery@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2563 bytes --]

Below, history of the FSF union and how it was intentionally created to
overcome bad behavior and poor leadership from RMS (he didn’t believe in
time of to mourn dead family members?!). A healthy and sustainable FSF is
important for the free/libre software movement. And... It’s healthy to have
constructive criticism. It shows trust and interest. FSF Can become better.
And from this narrative, it sounds like several staff and board members
struggled to make that happen, instead of simply denying grievances.

“RMS created non-safe spaces at both MIT & the FSF. When I was at the FSF,
RMS had little to no empathy for the staff. The FSF was not a healthy,
functional workplace. We formed a union to help protect ourselves from RMS
— he controlled our pay, benefits, and workplace conditions.

Everything was controlled by RMS — not the executive director, and not the
board. The union helped turn FSF employment into what most people think of
as a "normal" office job. It didn't fix everything. Some of the issues that
we did fix:

RMS did not believe in providing raises — prior cost of living adjustments
were a battle and not annual. RMS believed that if a precedent was created
for increasing wages, the logical conclusion would be that employees would
be paid infinity dollars and the FSF would go bankrupt.

RMS did not believe in providing bereavement leave. What if all your close
friends and family die one after another? It's conceivable you would be
gone from the office for days, or weeks, if not months. What if you lie
about who is dying?

RMS would often throw tantrums and threaten to fire employees for perceived
infractions. FSF staff had to show up to work each day, not knowing if RMS
had eliminated their position the night before.

RMS has not apologized for the harm he's caused. Both MIT & the FSF
successfully separated themselves from RMS in 2019. Why did the secret
group of voting FSF members reelect him to the board? Why.“

From
https://twitter.com/paulnivin/status/1377079987950395393

On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 2:14 PM quiliro <quiliro@riseup.net> wrote:

> Danny Spitzberg <stationaery@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Ali, I’m disappointed but not surprised you came to that conclusion yet
> > again. The history seems to be the opposite: FSF staff organized a union
> > because RMS was causing harm and dysfunction, and at best, RMS went along
> > and accepted it as a net positive state of affairs.
>
> Does all FSF support your view or is it just a hunch of yours?
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 2797 bytes --]

   Below, history of the FSF union and how it was intentionally created to
   overcome bad behavior and poor leadership from RMS (he didn’t believe
   in time of to mourn dead family members?!). A healthy and sustainable
   FSF is important for the free/libre software movement. And... It’s
   healthy to have constructive criticism. It shows trust and interest.
   FSF Can become better. And from this narrative, it sounds like several
   staff and board members struggled to make that happen, instead of
   simply denying grievances.

   “RMS created non-safe spaces at both MIT & the FSF. When I was at the
   FSF, RMS had little to no empathy for the staff. The FSF was not a
   healthy, functional workplace. We formed a union to help protect
   ourselves from RMS — he controlled our pay, benefits, and workplace
   conditions.

   Everything was controlled by RMS — not the executive director, and not
   the board. The union helped turn FSF employment into what most people
   think of as a "normal" office job. It didn't fix everything. Some of
   the issues that we did fix:

   RMS did not believe in providing raises — prior cost of living
   adjustments were a battle and not annual. RMS believed that if a
   precedent was created for increasing wages, the logical conclusion
   would be that employees would be paid infinity dollars and the FSF
   would go bankrupt.

   RMS did not believe in providing bereavement leave. What if all your
   close friends and family die one after another? It's conceivable you
   would be gone from the office for days, or weeks, if not months. What
   if you lie about who is dying?

   RMS would often throw tantrums and threaten to fire employees for
   perceived infractions. FSF staff had to show up to work each day, not
   knowing if RMS had eliminated their position the night before.

   RMS has not apologized for the harm he's caused. Both MIT & the FSF
   successfully separated themselves from RMS in 2019. Why did the secret
   group of voting FSF members reelect him to the board? Why.“

   From
   [1]https://twitter.com/paulnivin/status/1377079987950395393

   On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 2:14 PM quiliro <[2]quiliro@riseup.net> wrote:

     Danny Spitzberg <[3]stationaery@gmail.com> writes:
     > Ali, I’m disappointed but not surprised you came to that
     conclusion yet
     > again. The history seems to be the opposite: FSF staff organized a
     union
     > because RMS was causing harm and dysfunction, and at best, RMS
     went along
     > and accepted it as a net positive state of affairs.
     Does all FSF support your view or is it just a hunch of yours?

References

   1. https://twitter.com/paulnivin/status/1377079987950395393
   2. mailto:quiliro@riseup.net
   3. mailto:stationaery@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss