RMS pulls a serious power move (read: dick move), unilaterally appointing a maintainer to Guile without consulting the other co-maintainers or community, because the current co-maintainers disagree with him on governance lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gui

It's also worth reading @dthompson's followup here lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gui

David's experience is also mine; there's a reason I dropped my association as a "GNU hacker", which used to be the way I identified myself for some time.

For many people, I'm sure these things seem to be shocking, as if all of this is happening at once. I'm shocked by how fast things have devolved, but not the way they are, because I already saw and tried to change for years how bad it was until I gave up.

Show thread

@cwebber @dthompson

Smell like there are several power games at work in and in right now.

And since I've followed all the drama around ' mail and I've seen how a crowd of people lynched him for what he SAID, I can't say I'm shocked by this reaction from Andy.

I've read his words before and I see how he is trying to profit as much as possible from the shitstorm that is on right now.

@Shamar @cwebber so, uh, we're with Andy on this. if anyone is power hungry here, it's rms. we just want rms held accountable for his poor leadership.

@dthompson

I noticed you are with Andy.

That's why I replied to @cwebber

I don't know personally and I disagree with him on MANY MANY things. Even when we talk about I think he is too moderate (and I'm a catholic Christian so you might guess by yourselves on how many other things I deeply disagree with him! 😉).

But the arguments of Andy are poor. As the arguments of the crowd that got is head at .

is a form of expression, so software IS freedom of expression.

Andy joined the crowd that lynched for what he WROTE (conveniently misreading it, to be precise).

If you know that Stallman did any crime towards women, you have only ONE thing to do: denounce him and provide evidence to the police.

Each day you delay his trial is a day more you are accomplices of his crimes.

I'm very serious on this.
There is nothing else to do when you face a crime.

If RMS did any crime, denounce him.

Otherwise, please, stop this.

RMS 

@Shamar @dthompson @cwebber
"Not being a criminal" is not sufficient criteria for continuing to lead a project of such importance.

He sucks at leading, so he shouldn't lead. Simple as that.

No one even said he should be censored.

RMS 

@grainloom

Leading people means helping them move from a point to another.

Like it or not, but proved a great leadership in : he didn't just give it a definition and an identity, but turned it in a powerful and positive political movement. He was being so.successful that was created to embrace, extend and estinguish such movement.

Thank to we now have , browsers that are more complex to than operating systems and the four have been reduced to privileges.

However intransigence was still a pain in the ass for many people who want to finally absorb free software in open source.

Without Stallman at , are way stronger. Now THEY will lead!

Will be creepy with women?
No!

Does Google care about women?
Sure! They are valuable data cow to milk! Great workers! And useful conumers! Just like men.

Same for , and friends! They will be great leaders, if you want to be led where they want to milk you.

But I'm a weird . I prefer weird leaders. Because their weirdness protects mine. And yours.

Don't forget my words: nobody will fight for hackers' freedom. The gentrification process is running fast. First , now RMS... the next might be you!

@dthompson @cwebber

RMS 

@Shamar @dthompson @cwebber
He did those things what, 20 years ago?
And if a free software project can't even be nice to women, it doesn't deserve to exist.

Follow

if a free software project can't even be nice to women, it doesn't deserve to exist 

@grainloom

If a free software project has any aspect you don't like, it deserve to be forked.

welcome any .

Only people who cry of community breaks and such bullshit. After all forks reduce their share!

As for women, trust me: I care A LOT about them. I have three daughters I love most, and I always carefully consider what is good for them, in the present and in the future.

Is a homogenous world were all people talk the same good for them? Would it be safer?

The answer is simply No.

In Italy we have had a history of private abuses easily mixed with public to cover them.

In a world were people cannot TALK about something, such thing do not disappear. It just become invisible and more dangerous. Public just raise the stakes for powerful people, but it doesn't fix any perversion.

Since I want to effectively protect my daughters, I want a world where people with the weirdest opinions can discuss them while criminal like are rapidly and easily denounced.

Don't judge books by their cover: a project (or a man, or a woman or a company or..) might LOOK nice to a woman while being creepy and dangerous. And the converse can also be true.

I prefer places that are dangerous and look dangerous too.
They are LESS dangerous.

But censorship and mob lynching of opinion won't make things better.

@dthompson @cwebber

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves. A STEM-oriented instance.

No hate, No censorship. Be kind, be respectful

We federate with all servers: we don't block any servers.