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

Re: Asking DPL to shorten Discussion Period for rms-open-letter

Quoting Enrico Zini (2021-03-27 10:08:06)
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 02:31:28PM -0700, Luke W Faraone wrote:
> > Myself, I signed this letter based on both public information and 
> > the numerous times I've heard, unprompted, stories from women and 
> > female-presenting people who have had uncomfortable / creepy 
> > experiences with Stallman, in the Debian / free software community, 
> > the MIT community, and elsewhere.
> > 
> > I have heard first-hand stories from women who were new to the Free 
> > Software movement and, at a conference, were excited to meet its 
> > leader -- only to be hit on by Richard and invited back to continue 
> > the conversation at a residence. These people did not stay in the 
> > Free Software movement, and our community is poorer for it.
> > 
> > None of those incidents would have turned into a police report, and 
> > I'm not demanding that you rely on it. But it comes up so frequently 
> > at conferences, student clubs, and bar chats from so many different 
> > people that I have little reason to doubt its veracity.
> > 
> > It's also interesting to note that over 12 former FSF staff, who 
> > worked directly with Richard, also saw it fit to sign the letter.
> This! Thank you!
> I have regularly been among people sharing horror stories of what 
> happened when they hosted RMS at some event or another.
> In my experience there is an unwritten, alternative "RMS Rider", that 
> you should know before hosting/handling him, with things like "don't 
> you *ever* leave RMS alone with a woman!", "avoid mentioning this list 
> of words", "a number of basic expectations of human decency don't 
> apply, and you should be prepared for that".
> As long as he was in a somewhat official position of guru/leadership, 
> I was part of a community that tried its best to *handle* him, and to 
> *minimize his damage*. I understand that many people close to him 
> tried to talk to him, and that Stallman is about as famous for 
> speaking as for not listening. I believe that all this has held Free 
> Software back significantly.
> We had finally moved on from having a significant amount of the 
> community energy spent on *handling Stallman*. And now he's supposed 
> to be back "and I'm not planning to resign a second time"?
> Stallman can certainly *speak* about Free Software. Stallman cannot 
> *lead* the Free Software movement, or any influential part of it. We 
> had moved on, and we had mostly gotten away with it[1]. I don't want 
> to go back.

Thanks for your judgements(!), Luke and Enrico.

For the record, I do not defend actions of RMS.  I defend his right to a 
fair trial.

This mailinglist is for dicussing what to put on a ballot.

I need no further testimonies or evicence that RMS is a monster.  
Regardless of the amount and type of proof, Debian should in my opinion 
*not* take part in group shaming.  And *that* is relevant to discuss on 
this mailinglist: What to put on the ballot for the Debian vote.

The originally proposed text says that RMS has demonstrated that he is 
what he is being accused of being.  That is a way of turning allegations 
into facts - i.e. *judging* - and I worry for Debian officially stating 
that the allegations are facts is going too far, and that it is unneded 
if what we want is to distance ourselves from a monster.

Only if we want to punish the monster is it relevant to explicitly judge 
the monster.

It is my understanding that it is illegal for organisations to make such 
explicit judgements, which is a reason for us to avoid explicit 
judgement, even if that is in fact what we want to do.

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reply to: