[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: migrating away from the FDL

Mathieu Roy wrote:
Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> a tapoté :

Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk> said:
>RMS is the philosopher king of the Free Software Foundation.  Whether
>he is also autocratic, that is, "a dictatorial ruler", I don't know
>because I am not a member of the FSF.

As a GCC developer, I can tell you:  He is autocratic.  Sadly.

According to the definition we brought to this list of autocracy
(someone who thinks he got absolute power), I can discuss your point
of view.
He thinks he has absolute power *over the FSF*. He makes no claims regarding anything *else*. However, the FSF is run as his personal fiefdom, in which his opinion is final, no matter *what*. This is not normal for a charitable organization, and I don't think it's entirely healthy, either. Essentially, the FSF is run more like a private foundation than a public charitable foundation.

RMS usually accept to read everyone's point of view (unless they are
obviously offensive). So it cannot be that autocrat you're talking
So do many autocrats. This is more a kindness given by the monarch to his subjects than anything else, and that's exactly the tone which seems to emanate from RMS.

Indeed he leads some projects the way he wants to exactly and if
you're in, you have to accept it or to leave.
Which is fine to a certain extent; Linus Torvalds does the same thing with Linux.

However, RMS treats the FSF (and all FSF projects) this way. This means that giving money to the FSF is really not significantly different from giving money to RMS personally to do with as he pleases. The Board of Directors appears to be ineffectual. *That* is unfortunate.

I considered giving money to the FSF, but when I realized this, I decided it was a bad idea to do so. I'd rather give money to a real charitable organization than to an individual with erratic views. Your mileage may vary.

I'm still willing to give copyrights to the FSF, but *only* because the 'grantback' term in the copyright assignment form gives me the right to relicense my work under the terms of my choice.

But he also gave you the
freedom to take his software and to use it to make your own software.

If every "autocrat" was giving the permission to execute / read /
modify / redistribute their work, I wish to see many more autocrats
out there.
Yes, that would be nice, wouldn't it? :-)

This message, insofar as it was created by me, is released to the public domain.

Reply to: