Re: General Resolution: Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board

[Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org>]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 12:47:59AM +0100, Dominik George wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > The problem is that for good reason, we no longer trust the FSF under
> > its current governance to do that.  What you are affectively asking
> > people to do is to pursue justice in regard to things rms did in a forum
> > where rms has much more power than they do and where rms (and the voting
> > members of the fsf) have demonstrated they will use that power in non
> > equitible ways.
> > 
> > Given how rms returned to the board, how can you possibly think those
> > people will get a fair hearing.
> 
> Obviously, such a committee would have to be instated in a transparent
> way and in close cooperation with people and organisations not
> involved with rms otherwise. I do think that this is possible by both
> having the current FSF board start such action, but not take control
> of it.
> 
As this thread and the other related threads on the various Debian
lists have developed, it seems that RMS is a symptom of a larger
problem.

It seems to me that any meaningful action (where meaningful is defined
as "helping to advance the cause of libre software) must begin with the
question: "what value does the FSF *brand* have?"

If the answer is along the lines of "excellent reputation, very
influential with leaders in the technology and political spheres, a
proven track record of advancing the cause, an extensive network which
could be preserved and leveraged even after the leadership replacement,
etc.", then it seems like it is something worth fighting for.  If, on
the other hand, the answer is along the lines of "doing more harm than
good to the community, dead weight, nobody much cares what they say/do",
then it seems like effort would be better directed toward bypassing or
ignoring the problematic organization and getting on with the business
at hand.

Perhaps said another way, the only valid reason for directing a bunch of
attention toward the FSF is if they are worth salvaging.  Plenty of
comments in the last few days seem to indicate that such might not be
the case.  Why not form a new organization, like "The Foundation for
Free Software (FFS)"?  Or some name that is better distinguished from
that of the FSF.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez