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

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

Le samedi 27 mars 2021 à 10:41:57+0100, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> 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.

A fair trial is what you expect from the society when your actions are
put under the justice system.

Here as a group of people, his trial is mostly what he said publicly and
never apologised for.

I don't really see why you'd like him to get any sort of """trial"""
when he had plenty opportunities to prove himself to have become better.


Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: