Re: Support RMS

[Thomas Lord <lord@basiscraft.com>]

> "What we need to do, is have very robust standards of how people 
> behave,  drawn up by and for the community,"

The only "problem" you seem to have a solution for is the one of a few 
people making fairly ridiculous accusations and complaints.  Your 
solution is apparently to put them in charge of a much more 
authoritarian organization.

Can we get back to hacking for liberation, please.  This has become 
tedious and absurd.  Neither the FSF nor the people who support it are 
here to coddle people making unreasonable demands on society at large.

-t


On 2021-03-26 10:05, Paul Sutton via libreplanet-discuss wrote:
> On 26/03/2021 15:54, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> I really appreciate seeing the perspective from Georgia. Thanks also
>> deeply to Deb Nicholson for engaging here in this space. Obviously,
>> these negative reports about RMS being presented *here* amounts to the
>> opposite of an echo-chamber. These voices are bring extremely valuable
>> perspective — the sort we *lose* if we aren't careful to assure that 
>> our
>> spaces are not only open to anyone but actually in *practice* have 
>> them
>> feel welcome and stay.
>> 
>> The Free Software movement is weaker for every loss of perspective. We
>> have a duty to be not only gracious but appreciative of people like 
>> Deb
>> for engaging and staying with us despite the tensions.
>> 
>> Georgia's line is exceptionally important: "…the fact that he faced
>> consequences for his creepy Epdtein-adjacent comments and not the
>> decades of shitty behavior…"
>> 
>> These are not people who are dogpiling on hearsay or gotcha online
>> statements or whatever else. Those anti-patterns do indeed happen, and
>> they polluted and harmed the credibility of the recent open letter
>> against RMS. But here we have people who fully understand the 
>> unfairness
>> and yet can express from extensive personal experience the *actual*
>> reasons why RMS's leadership is problematic.
>> 
>> As someone who deeply and profoundly respects RMS for various reasons, 
>> I
>> still don't just simply support his leadership role. I do not want him
>> banished, I want him to learn and do better on his pain points. I 
>> don't
>> want to be naive though, efforts in this direction have obviously been
>> done for years and not been enough.
>> 
>> I would like to continue to get RMS' insightful and pointed 
>> perspectives
>> without having him lead the organization. I would like him to live in
>> the zone where his genius most thrives and he contributes the most, 
>> and
>> I suggest that the other roles he has had would be better filled by 
>> others.
>> 
>> If we want a resilient movement, we need to be really open to engaging
>> with complaints. An organization that defends the status quo against
>> such critics is like the NSA attacking Ed Snowden and people 
>> insinuating
>> that Snowden is working for Russia (similar to people talking about 
>> how
>> Deb now works for the OSI and the OSI is connected to corporations).
>> 
>> I'm not suggesting deference to the outside unfair critics, the people
>> who do indeed levy unfair attacks, mine quotes, spread FUD, etc. That
>> stuff can be real, and we need to defend against it.
>> 
>> But people like Deb are our whistleblowers, they are insiders who are
>> bringing attention to serious issues. If we ignore or attack
>> whistleblowers, we will fail to learn important lessons. This attitude
>> can be fatal to a movement.
>> 
>> In solidarity,
>> Aaron Wolf
>> (FSF member since 2014, co-founder of Snowdrift.coop)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
>> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
>> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
>> 
> 
> 
> I agree, here,  there are clearly things that have happened that are
> of concern, but that seems to happen elsewhere in the free software,
> the tech community and out side too.
> 
> What we need to do, is have very robust standards of how people
> behave,  drawn up by and for the community, standards based on good
> practice from other communities, and look beyond free software. Ideas
> / policies need to be evidence, data based so that they are credible.
> 
> Once done, and it will never get fully completed, as it is needs to be
> constantly refined, it is not a write once then forget thing.
> 
> * Examine Annually, to make sure the policy / policies are still
> working, relevant, inclusive and represent everyone concerned.
> 
> * Clear policy on training, of staff and new staff / volunteers so
> people are educated in equality and diversity.  If that means an
> agreed policy on pronouns it is then consistent fsf wide.
> 
> * A clear policy on what happens, if a complaint is made, how it is
> handled, time scale and what, if any the consequences are, how are
> allegations handled for example?
> 
> * Fully transparent,
> 
> * Something that can be learnt from
> 
> * Everyone agrees and no one is above this
> 
> * A policy where you are innocent of a crime till proven guilty, this
> protects both victims and the accused.  Investigations should aim to
> reach the facts of what happened,
> 
> * If these things are handled properly, there is no need to
> whistleblow or just leave which to me that is a last resort.
> 
> * Make it clear what the talk is about, and the talk is relevant to
> free software, drm, etc, Right to repair or which ever it is,
> 
> We have a safe space policy for libre  that states certain things are
> not tolerated.
> 
> 
> Just a few thoughts
> 
> Hope it helps
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

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