Re: Support RMS

[Aaron Wolf]

Thomas, I'll be blunt and clear here: You seem to believe that I oppose
RMS and just agree with the people who want him ousted. You are wrong.

You seem not to be recognizing that this community includes people who
are neither on the side of defend-RMS-and-reject-all-attacks nor the
side of RMS-is-an-awful-bigot-who-must-go.

You have not engaged with anything I'm saying, you seem to treat it all
as if I'm trying to use crafty language to argue for what you see as the
opposing viewpoint. You haven't bothered to check how much we actually
even disagree.

In all the replies in which you suggest that things are *only* absurd or
*only* black-and-white, you are simply denying the messy complex reality.

Ask everyone else. I guarantee you will easily find people who you
recognize as on *your* side of the argument who can also tell you flat
out that what I'm saying here is constructive, nuanced, and helpful.

Not everyone who supports RMS is in quite as defensive a state as you
currently appear to be.

If you want to ignore me, you can do so. Or if you want to understand my
positions and engage respectfully, we can go in that direction.


On 2021-03-26 7:50 p.m., Thomas Lord wrote:
> I think I have made it quite clear, Aaron, that I don't believe you are
> doing more here than wasting still more of everyone's time, rehashing
> the same old assertions on a list not established for that purpose,
> picking at scabs.   I can't tell whether you are malicious or just
> confused but either way....
> 
> If you feel as strongly as you seem to say you do, perhaps it is time to
> disassociate yourself from the FSF and GNU.   Since I doubt you wish to
> do either, please accept that endless re-litigation serves nobody here
> in this specific context.
> 
> 
> 
> -t
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2021-03-26 19:29, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> Thomas, you are using the fact that *some* accusations have not held up
>> to scrutiny in order to conclude that all accusations have been
>> scrutinized and not held up.
>>
>> I wonder if you would be more gracious if the accusers did more to
>> emphasize both the unfair aspects of some accusations and emphasized the
>> positive aspects of RMS. But I'm not optimistic. You don't seem at all
>> interested in considering whether there are really valid concerns here.
>>
>> FWIW, I acknowledge how hard it is, especially at a distance, to make
>> sense of claims that RMS is sexist (and worse) when he has for years
>> gone out of his way to express support for feminist political causes in
>> terms of highlighting news articles or talking about principles.
>>
>> Accepting for this comment that his behavior really has been what Deb
>> and others describe in their experiences (I have done the scrutiny and
>> all their concerns have held up as far as I could scrutinize)… I don't
>> think RMS is a hypocrite as much as he is oblivious. I mean, I suspect
>> maybe in some fundamental way, he doesn't quite *get* the issues with
>> his own behavior.
>>
>> Perhaps in his mind, none of the ways he flirted with women or made
>> jokes etc., maybe none of that fit into the concepts that he recognized
>> as sexist, and his own honest awareness of sexism and its problems in
>> society and policy just seemed distinct. Put simply: he doesn't
>> recognize his problems because he doesn't do the *type* of sexist
>> behavior/talking that he recognizes as bad and criticizes in others (if
>> he did *that*, then it would be hypocritical).
>>
>> I happen also to basically agree with the sentiment that RMS is widely
>> misunderstood, and the style of accusation we commonly see is a
>> non-understanding one. But that's not enough to disregard the ways his
>> behavior has caused harm to the movement — and I'm not talking about the
>> unfair out-of-context gotcha stuff, I'm talking about the pattern of
>> awkward behavior the is both more subtle and persistent, the stuff that
>> has discouraged many people over the years, people who dealt with him
>> day-to-day.
>>
>> Thomas, at least in principle, if you had the opportunity to have a
>> private discussion with a man who worked closely with RMS for years and
>> who could explain his history of issues while acknowledging RMS's genius
>> and significance, would you be open to learning from that? Or would you
>> just reject the opportunity because you are already sure you know all
>> you need to know?
>>
>> Although I would like to believe that I'd always be open-minded as a
>> personal habit, it happens that what got me to recognize the issues more
>> fully is precisely that I have had the opportunity to know and talk to
>> people close to RMS. My *inclination* otherwise is to be skeptical of
>> the critics because I very much recognize RMS's good intentions and
>> fundamentally strong ethical foundations in his worldview. I still see
>> those things today, even though I don't deny the problem behaviors.
>>
>> On 2021-03-26 5:16 p.m., Thomas Lord wrote:
>>>
>>> This has gotten beyond absurd.  For years, this list has not been used
>>> discuss developments, share projects, or even coordionate transportation
>>> and lodging.  It has been dominated by a few people making the same
>>> accusations again and again, and having others push back.   The
>>> accusations have never held up to scrutiny, even though we can assume
>>> some people make them with full sincerity.
>>>
>>> Enough already.
>>>
>>> -t
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2021-03-26 16:03, Deb Nicholson wrote:
>>>> Well, it's disappointing but not surprising that a call for improving
>>>>    the way people are treated within the free software movement is
>>>> being
>>>>    seen by some on this list as "hateful" or somehow in "opposition to
>>>>    free software." I honestly don't see how creating a haven for sexist
>>>>    behavior and disrespect can lead to the movement's growth, but maybe
>>>>    I'm mistaken in thinking that we all want that growth.
>>>>    I am grateful to those who are interested in working towards an
>>>>    inclusive and non-toxic future for the free software movement. Maybe
>>>>    I'll get to work with you all someday on one of the projects that is
>>>>    interested in growing the free software movement.
>>>>    Best,
>>>>    Deb
>>>>
>>>>    On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:03 PM Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      * Deb Nicholson <[1]deb@eximiousproductions.com> [2021-03-26
>>>> 16:52]:
>>>>      >    An interesting thing about men who harass women is that they
>>>>      usually
>>>>      >    don't do it to men. Men who let the community know that they
>>>>      "don't
>>>>      >    believe in harassment" are the last people to find out it's
>>>>      happening,
>>>>      >    because no one feels safe telling them.
>>>>      Generalization without end.
>>>>      Why are you sending accusations to this mailing list? How is this
>>>>      mailing list to defend your rights? Or is your only purpose to
>>>>      divide
>>>>      and bring more hate here?
>>>>
>>>> References
>>>>
>>>>    1. mailto:deb@eximiousproductions.com
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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