As you point out, people have free speech rights. So Fedora, Red Hat and others have exercised their free speech rights to say what they think about the situation, and to act based on what they think.
I mean, free speech work both way, you know ?
3 Likes
maybe restricting him from holding a leadership position would be more reasonable than completely cancelling him?
This is exactly what the Fedora Council is asking forā¦
As for evidence:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210325013706/https://stallman.org/archives/2018-jul-oct.html#23_September_2018_(Cody_Wilson)
https://web.archive.org/web/20210325013844/https://stallman.org/archives/2017-sep-dec.html#13_November_2017_(Jelani_Maraj)
https://web.archive.org/web/20210325014131/https://stallman.org/archives/2014-jul-oct.html#26_October_2014_(Prison_for_cartoon)
https://web.archive.org/web/20210325014348/https://stallman.org/archives/2016-jul-oct.html#31_October_2016_(Downās_syndrome)
https://web.archive.org/web/20161107050933/https://stallman.org/archives/2016-jul-oct.html#31_October_2016_(Downās_syndrome)
That is just the tip of the iceberg.
2 Likes
Iām really not sure thereās a lot more to say in this thread that hasnāt been said already. Iām starting to see a lot of repetition. I do appreciate people keeping the tone civil, and I appreciate thoughtful (and passionate!) responses, and therefore am going to provide a few hopefully-final replies. Iām also going to move this topic to the Council Discuss category, which I think is more appropriate. (Letās keep the āOff-Topicā category for talking about cool things openSUSE and Arch are doing, Arduino hacking, Linux on Mars, etc.)
I certainly understand this sentiment, but the fact is, weāre part of the Free Software world ā and proudly so. We could have chosen to not say anything, but that isnāt really staying out of it. It would just be a different kind of statement.
Iām glad you donāt believe that I reacted before being aware of the facts, because ā¦ I didnāt. Nor did the rest of the Fedora Council. We take this seriously, and after the surprise announcement, took time to discuss and be sure, following our normal consensus process to come to the statement we released on April 2, quite a bit later than many other free and open source software organizations put out statements or even co-signed the letter.
The narrative that this is a rushed, pop-up mob of people who arenāt involved just doesnāt hold water. I read the link you provided, and frankly, I donāt think itās very compelling. Itās got dramatic rhetoric, but itās all very one sided, and presents a clearly-not-true narrative that free software advocates in general support their position.
Iām glad that you had a positive experience in meeting Stallman in person. Unfortunately, that is not a universal experience.
As Michael notes, that is literally what weāre asking for. I asked further back in the thread that people not throw the word ācancelā around, because other than being a hot thing to say on twitter that sounds really bad, Iām not sure what it actually means, and if some people think it means one thing and others another, at best weāre either talking past each other or arguing about semantics. And I donāt want to do either of those things.
6 Likes
I posted lots of stuff, but I canāt take credit for that tidbit, that was @nickavem who rightfully pointed that.
4 Likes
I wanted to say that but didnāt want to be that guy 
1 Like
OK, so weāre a political organization then? How do you feel about the fact that killers, drug dealers and criminals of all kinds use our distro for all kinds of purposes? Should we do something about it too? Based on whoās morals? Of which culture? ā¦
My ReiserFS example was to point out that we didnāt post a position at the time and; yes, we keep distributing his software. Put in other terms, letās say the cancellation is on you. We drive you away from fedora, forbid you to work here and/or hold any leadership position; all this while we use your lifeās work to do whatever.
Yeah, gcc is rmsā project. As much as linux is Linusā project. They havenāt contributed any code to those for a while. So what? Itās still theirs. They started it.
Thatās all I have to say for now. Doesnāt seem like there is anyone paying attention anyway. Do as you please. This changes my opinion of Fedora. A political organizationā¦ what a tragedy.
2 Likes
You seems to oppose to Fedora being āa political organizationā, without really defining it.
However, you have no problem with the FSF, who is clearly branding itself as political (cf the talks at Libre Planet as I pointed out). I canāt reconcile the contradiction coming from theses 2 facts, and really, this make hard to understand your position.
You keep speaking of ReiserFS, but as far as I know, Hans Reiser is in jail for murder. I do not think RMS murdered someone, so thatās really hard to understand why you are trying to compare. There is a lot of nuance between āput people in jail for 15 years minimumā and āpeople write a letter to say to not give leadershipā.
Linus continue to show technical leadership, check code, write patches, and delegate.
The last time Linus committed on the Linux git repository was 3h ago:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=89698becf06d341a700913c3d89ce2a914af69a2
RMS last commit on GCC is gcc.gnu.org Git - gcc.git/commit
Thatās from 2003. To just put thing in perspective, Fedora didnāt exist yet.
The one before is
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=58a1b05a2f8f7de2d3ebd6a81c84b2c0e1688dc4
It date back to 1997. In 1997, the latest Debian version was 1.3 (and back in this days, they were releasing every 6 months, and skipped 1.0).
But you know also what happened in 1997, besides Debian release and Titanic in theatre ?
People forked GCC to create EGCS, because the FSF (e.g., RMS) was a bit too controlling, and so developpers decided to units all the fork since the FSF wouldnāt accept them. This proved so successful that 2 years after, in 1999, the FSF dropped their branch of GCC, and decided that the fork would be called the official GCC.
So we canāt really say that GCC is RMS project, because when he acted as project leader, people forked so much that it killed his branch, and he didnāt contribute again as we have seen.
4 Likes
I wouldnāt say Fedora is a political organization, no more than any other business or organization. Fedora business is obviously not politics. All Fedora did in this instance was publish an opinion, which is their right and actually is a good thing. Generally speaking, we need thoughtful participation in society. As I mentioned earlier, I would have advised sitting this one out. That said, the best way to support the FSF at this point is to donate or join if you have the means, and/or make your support visible. Start using your FSF email address, wear a t-shirt or a hat. Much of this is a tempest in a teapot and will blow over. Youāve got to pick your battles.
1 Like
In reply, thank you for focus in the two questions that are important (IMO) .
Words of RMS and acts of RMS , about the words what I read is āthe punishment have to fit in the crimeā , RMS not say that isnāt a crime, it says that is a less punishable than what they paint . Of course this can be very offensive for the family of the victims, for example. But applying the same principal (the punishment have to fit in the crime) , in my point of view these opinions are personal views and thoughts and not what the organization defends as important, so one thing is the organization defend and spread these ideas as the right thing, other (less punishable) is personal comments and different points of view.
We can read Political Notes Archives - Richard Stallman without web.archive, I donāt find any difference and the tip of iceberg is very repetitive it seems to me is more a storm in a glass of water.
About acts and behavior I donāt know .
Finally, I completely agree with GBCox (first comment)
Iāve deleted a post with accusations of āforming a cultā and a āmobā and ācanceling peopleā when I specifically asked for us to not do that. Most of the post seems entirely irrelevant to Fedora.
Please donāt make me lock this thread entirely.
4 Likes
I did not merely accuse anyone of participating in a mob, I actually brought up some points and actual incidents regarding this whole campaign and did so in response to somebody else freely speaking their mind above.
Iām not going to repost my message here as Iām sure youāre just going to take it down once more.
For the record, Iām not a fan of Stallman, but youāre far more āproblematicā for the future of an accepting and welcoming foss community than he could ever hope to be for acting the way you do.
Apparently the Fedora Council does not take criticism lightly nor do you actually value inclusiveness and diversity as much as you honestly believe you do.
Itās an open and safe space alright, as long as you align yourself with whatever feels right to a certain group of people anyway.
Most of the post seems entirely irrelevant to Fedora.
Unlike the representation of an organization that is completely separate to Fedora that is?
3 Likes
You put āproblematicā in quotes just now, but no one else in this thread has used that term. In fact, in general, your removed message appears to be addressed to someone other than the other participants of this conversation. The Fedora Council (nor anyone representing the Fedora Project) did not draft the original letter, and the Fedora Council after discussion decided to make our own separate statement. Your reply was nominally to Michael, but he didnāt write the open letter, nor did he write the Fedora Council statement, and it remains true that the accusations of forming a āmobā and ācultā are unwarranted and unhelpful.
Youāre welcome to criticize actions of the Fedora Council. We can take it. But keep it relevant and on topic (as well as civil!) ā and think about whether it actually adds anything new. A lot of this is already covered in this thread and rehashing it doesnāt seem valuable.
4 Likes
Yet you support the very same cruel notion all the same, thus I criticize the way you judge someone unfairly and even attempt to serve online justice to someone thatās not actually been convicted of anything.
Your reply was nominally to Michael, but he didnāt write the open letter, nor did he write the Fedora Council statement
I did reply to the quoted parts of Michaelās posts, yet for the most part I generally addressed the people in favour of burning a man on the cross for being rude and socially awkward over cherry-picked and arguably interpreted in an opinionated way past statements.
Itās a shame my original post isnāt actually here anymore for us to actually discuss.
However I do understand quoting Michael above only to move on to using a plural āyouā while addressing the people supporting the open letter and whatnot could have been easily enough misinterpreted as a personal attack towards them specifically and for that at least I am indeed sorry.
it remains true that the accusations of forming a āmobā and ācultā are unwarranted and unhelpful.
I fail to see how this warrants the removal of my post.
What if that is indeed what this is? Shouldnāt people be able to even bring it for discussion?
What if itās not and people canāt get a chance to disprove the points you removed?
Shouldnāt I and everyone else reading their own replies have a chance to reconsider our own logic in this?
Iām not crying over muh freedom of speech or anything of that sort, mind you, itās your discussion forum, you can publish whatever you like, but donāt do it in the name of inclusion, at least not for harmless discussion posts.
By prohibiting people from debating this openly youāre directly undermining discussion and thatās just bad for everyone regardless of which side of the debate youāre standing on.
Youāre welcome to criticize actions of the Fedora Council. We can take it. But keep it relevant and on topic (as well as civil!) ā and think about whether it actually adds anything new. A lot of this is already covered in this thread and rehashing it doesnāt seem valuable.
Regrettably, I donāt think I am. Not when my criticism of your handling is being removed anyway.
I believe my mention of the much discussed open letter against RMS being surpassed in signatures by an open letter of support against this paranoia was fairly valuable to the discussion, especially considering how the former was slyly locked as if to pretend that was the reason for it and even prevented people from removing their signatures after having a change of heart.
3 Likes
This is simply untrue:
Except that was not the case originally.
People even came up with a different repo to show their intent for it.
This repo do not show any link of anyone was getting refused, while I showed someone saying on a random comment āremove meā and show the person was removed. I can imagine this was created in good faith, but so far, there is 1 person who asked to be removed, who was removed so it is disingenuous to say āprevented peopleā when there was 1 person, who was removed and without knowing who that person contacted, nor how long that person waited.
This is likely the same as rumors of people being blocked from getting jobs, which is not substantiated at all (see Are signers of this petition being blacklisted? Ā· rms-support-letter/rms-support-letter.github.io Ā· Discussion #6749 Ā· GitHub ).
Sure, maybe someone said on IRC/Twitter said something, but someone, this morphed into some industry wide ban of gigantic proportion ?
Both rumors would be stupid moves if true, both rumors do not come with links or anything to be verified, both rumors likely came from minor problems and both stories appeal to emotion to make people react (and in both cases, some sense of injustice).
Thatās the textbook recipe for a moral panic, which is usually pretty suspicious once you start to recognize it.
Letās also not argue about rumors around this in general? I think everyoneās position is pretty clear. I donāt think anyone in this discussion has bad intentā¦ but I also donāt think itās going anywhere useful.
3 Likes
What strikes me is the homogeneity of this movement weāre observing. We hear the repeated call for ādiversityā and āinclusionā, but itās rather single minded that Iāve observed. Furthermore, whatever can be said about itās aims and prescription for civility, itās appears that ādiversity of ideasāātrue diversity of mindāthe least bit countervailing, isnāt welcome.
Thatās a big tell for me ā¦ My intuition says this movement isnāt organic. Rather, I believe itās been inculcated, institutionally, and not least via the institution of pop-culture.
I remember in the nineties, the messaging in this approximate area was all about āprejudiceā. It was brought to us by the likes of MTVāback when MTV was a novel and powerful force in pop-cultureāand the message was generally good, IMO. It called for caution of our own prejudices; that we risk being deceived by them and possibly risk hurting others. A fine message. A larger life lesson, really.
Then, somehow, over my lifetime, the pop-vectors morphed into messaging about inter-sectional politics, exaltation of victim-hood, grievance/outrage culture, vilifying white people, resist (with obvious exceptions), seeing racism in EVERYTHING, riots and so on ā¦
The results of which have spoken loudly for itself at this point; itās essence is destruction and discord, it is disharmony and pain.
That said, I guess an RMS witch-hunt was inevitable. Therein, a cutting-at-the-edges schism aimed at what harmony and contentment exists in FOSS? ā¦ Frankly, Iām just waiting for the next thing at this point. Itāll be pretty interesting to see, if indeed FOSS is a target.
Nevertheless, whatever RMSās foibles, his contributions to FOSS are indisputable at this point. Thatās what I choose to focus on. Thatās what I fear is really being attacked here. Thereās no such thing as a perfect vessel and I doubt any of us, if actually tested in this new politically woke ether, might stand to scrutiny. Less, we conform to all itās decrees and become homogeneous of mind in itās ideology. Which, paradoxically, isnāt diverse or inclusive, and that is why I believe itās a fraud.
4 Likes
Not sure what that ā[sic]ā is doing in there (and not saying you were the one to insert it, @mattdm) ā Stallman is a known advocate of genderless pronouns derived from the word āpersonā. āPerā is both the subject and object form. (With āpersā as the possessive, and āperselfā as the reflexive.)
Not to take this too far off topic, butā¦ speaking as one of those āwhite personsā, racism really is baked into pretty much EVERYTHING, at least here in the US. The country was frickinā built on it.
And even today, we generally excel at pretending thatās not the case, and complaining about people being unwilling to just āget over itā. Slightly lower marks when it comes to confronting those uncomfortable realities, and actually working to understand and address the fundamental ways that white privilege has always shaped, and continues to shape, American society and culture. (And I fear that status quo will remain, unless we somehow manage to completely overhaul āWhite Americaāsā relationship with the topic of racism and evolve it beyond just knee-jerk defensiveness.)
Regarding āriotsā (hardly a new phenomenon within your lifetime, unless youāre well over 200!)ā¦ well, Iāll defer to the words of someone who put it better than I could ever hope to:
Now I wanted to say something about the fact that we have lived over these last two or three summers with agony and we have seen our cities going up in flames. And I would be the first to say that I am still committed to militant, powerful, massive, nonĀ-violence as the most potent weapon in grappling with the problem from a direct action point of view. Iām absolutely convinced that a riot merely intensifies the fears of the white community while relieving the guilt. And I feel that we must always work with an effective, powerful weapon and method that brings about tangible results.
But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard.
And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.
ā Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, āThe Other Americaā, delivered at Grosse Pointe High School, Detroit, MI, March 14, 1968
(OK, I admit, I took it pretty far off topic. My apologies.)