On 26/03/2021 15:54, Aaron Wolf wrote:
I really appreciate seeing the perspective from Georgia. Thanks also
deeply to Deb Nicholson for engaging here in this space. Obviously,
these negative reports about RMS being presented *here* amounts to the
opposite of an echo-chamber. These voices are bring extremely valuable
perspective — the sort we *lose* if we aren't careful to assure that
our
spaces are not only open to anyone but actually in *practice* have
them
feel welcome and stay.
The Free Software movement is weaker for every loss of perspective. We
have a duty to be not only gracious but appreciative of people like
Deb
for engaging and staying with us despite the tensions.
Georgia's line is exceptionally important: "…the fact that he faced
consequences for his creepy Epdtein-adjacent comments and not the
decades of shitty behavior…"
These are not people who are dogpiling on hearsay or gotcha online
statements or whatever else. Those anti-patterns do indeed happen, and
they polluted and harmed the credibility of the recent open letter
against RMS. But here we have people who fully understand the
unfairness
and yet can express from extensive personal experience the *actual*
reasons why RMS's leadership is problematic.
As someone who deeply and profoundly respects RMS for various reasons,
I
still don't just simply support his leadership role. I do not want him
banished, I want him to learn and do better on his pain points. I
don't
want to be naive though, efforts in this direction have obviously been
done for years and not been enough.
I would like to continue to get RMS' insightful and pointed
perspectives
without having him lead the organization. I would like him to live in
the zone where his genius most thrives and he contributes the most,
and
I suggest that the other roles he has had would be better filled by
others.
If we want a resilient movement, we need to be really open to engaging
with complaints. An organization that defends the status quo against
such critics is like the NSA attacking Ed Snowden and people
insinuating
that Snowden is working for Russia (similar to people talking about
how
Deb now works for the OSI and the OSI is connected to corporations).
I'm not suggesting deference to the outside unfair critics, the people
who do indeed levy unfair attacks, mine quotes, spread FUD, etc. That
stuff can be real, and we need to defend against it.
But people like Deb are our whistleblowers, they are insiders who are
bringing attention to serious issues. If we ignore or attack
whistleblowers, we will fail to learn important lessons. This attitude
can be fatal to a movement.
In solidarity,
Aaron Wolf
(FSF member since 2014, co-founder of Snowdrift.coop)
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
I agree, here, there are clearly things that have happened that are
of concern, but that seems to happen elsewhere in the free software,
the tech community and out side too.
What we need to do, is have very robust standards of how people
behave, drawn up by and for the community, standards based on good
practice from other communities, and look beyond free software. Ideas
/ policies need to be evidence, data based so that they are credible.
Once done, and it will never get fully completed, as it is needs to be
constantly refined, it is not a write once then forget thing.
* Examine Annually, to make sure the policy / policies are still
working, relevant, inclusive and represent everyone concerned.
* Clear policy on training, of staff and new staff / volunteers so
people are educated in equality and diversity. If that means an
agreed policy on pronouns it is then consistent fsf wide.
* A clear policy on what happens, if a complaint is made, how it is
handled, time scale and what, if any the consequences are, how are
allegations handled for example?
* Fully transparent,
* Something that can be learnt from
* Everyone agrees and no one is above this
* A policy where you are innocent of a crime till proven guilty, this
protects both victims and the accused. Investigations should aim to
reach the facts of what happened,
* If these things are handled properly, there is no need to
whistleblow or just leave which to me that is a last resort.
* Make it clear what the talk is about, and the talk is relevant to
free software, drm, etc, Right to repair or which ever it is,
We have a safe space policy for libre that states certain things are
not tolerated.
Just a few thoughts
Hope it helps
Paul
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss