libreplanet-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Support RMS

From: Thomas Lord
Subject: Re: Support RMS
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 11:11:04 -0700
User-agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.16
Yes. Every "movement"-type organization I have ever associated with goes through period of time when people come and try to divide and conquer, drumming up false complaints, trying to impose new rules that will, gosh, give themselves power over others, trying to discredit the most effective movement members.
This is no different - we are just getting endless repetition of the same accusations that don't stand up to scrutiny.
It is the people spreading those lies who distract us from hacking for liberation and teaching others why software freedom matters and how they can help create it. Hopefully, after yet another of their failures to sustain a case, some of them will find the door and find something else to do. 

-t



On 2021-03-26 11:00, Ali Reza Hayati wrote:

So basically some people are claiming RMS helped to set up a union to
protect people from himself and that's one reason not to support RMS.

You guys are making me support him more.
On March 26, 2021 5:51:57 PM UTC, Thomas Lord <lord@basiscraft.com> wrote:
"It is union to try to protect people from RMS. / That's it. That's the 
reason."

As a matter of history that is simply and purely a lie.

I don't see any of that kind of complaint, at this point, as anything
less or more than direct attempts to sabotage the FSF, the FSM, and GNU. 
   It has no place here.  You are free not to associate with the FSF
and you should, it would seem, take that option.

-t

On 2021-03-26 10:46, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
A union certainly helped everyone set and keep healthy boundaries. I have no doubt RMS was supportive. Like Paul suggested, a set of community agreements or a code of conduct or a contributor covenant or whatever is generally a good thing.
But as for the reason why staff organized the union -- you may call it silly, but here is the testimony in their own words:
" I think that many people do not know that the FSF is a union shop, or why. 

It is union to try to protect people from RMS.

That's it. That's the reason.
Knowing some of the story about how this came to be, it really informed my own thinking about what a union can do, and can't do.
Unionizing provided protections and standard benefits (like berievement leave) for workers at FSF. It could not remove RMS from a position of power.
I think the issue for workers at the time was that RMS held unchecked authority. It did not matter that there was a board of FSF: you could not tell RMS what to do.
Using the power that the law provides to force negotiations on a written contract was the only option. 

That is just... Not normal. Right?"

From
https://twitter.com/_msw_/status/1374538607982088197
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Thomas Lord <lord@basiscraft.com> wrote:
That's silly. The FSF was unionized with the encouragement and support of the FSF executives and board, including RMS, because unions are good, at least while the injustice of wage labor still exists.
he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.
I regard that as a straight up lie because none of the derogatory things said about him have supported that conclusion.
Once again, you are free not to associate with the FSF or the movement, but pretending to be an ally while repeating slanders should not be tolerated here or anywhere. 

-t

On 2021-03-26 10:32, Danny Spitzberg wrote:
Consider the fact that several FSF staff are going public for having organized and joined a union in order to protect themselves against the whims and wills of RMS, like if he suddenly decided to take away health insurance for everyone or other workplace dysfunction.
Forming a union and finally talking about it isn't "whistleblowing" because obviously the staff and board chose to contain the problem rather than solve or eliminate it.
However, I think we can agree that it's compelling nonetheless and adds to the view that while RMS contributed good things, he also caused harm to people and to the FSF organization and the free software movement.
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 10:25 AM Thomas Lord <lord@basiscraft.com> wrote: It's wrong to describe people as "whistle blowers" when they 
have not produced a complaint that stands up to scrutiny.

-t

On 2021-03-26 08:54, 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


_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
reply via email to
[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]