Re: Is negative publicity always harmful? (was: Women and GNU and RMS)
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 16:02 -0500, Thompson, David wrote: > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 3:44 PM Andreas wrote: > > > > To avoid that it's best to just leave it, as suggested, or else > > make a > > serious and well-founded claim and illustrate how it impacts GNU > > and > > its functions. I think anything else at this moment in time is > > simply > > detrimental to GNU and any discourse around it. > > Maybe this would be a reasonable request if we ignored all the > context > of what has transpired in the past month or so (which, we must not > forget, was just the straw that broke the camel's back after *years* > of problematic behavior) just facts please. > , but given the context I think this is > nothing more than gaslighting. There is no honest need for me, or > anyone else, to rehash the issues as if they haven't already been > cited numerous times by others. Given *this* context--the context of the misc-discuss list of the GNU project and not the wider sphere of social networks or even the FSF-- (intellectual) honesty is very much needed. What has the current chief GNUisance said or done that makes him unsuitable for his role of providing guidance in matters of software freedom and interpreting the four software freedoms as pertaining to GNU software and licensing? If no such reason exists, there really should be no point in rehashing any unrelated issues or personal opinions on those issues, and it would be best to just leave it be since it's needlessly divisive in the current context. -Andreas
Re: Is negative publicity always harmful? (was: Women and GNU and RMS)
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 3:44 PM Andreas wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 13:26 -0500, Thompson, David wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:59 PM Brandon Invergo > > wrote: > > > > Can we just leave it there? > > > > I don't think we can. RMS is GNU's leader, and his public comments, > > whether or not they are specifically about free software, are > > relevant > > to GNU. Some of us are tired of looking the other way. > > "Looking the other way" is a spurious allegation, implying a wrong is > being committed that is willfully overlooked and furthermore implying > that those disagreeing or unaware are complicit in the wrong. > > Unless such assertions are backed up they remain speculation that > cannot be falsified against or reasoned about, and will continue to > linger and damage GNU. > > To avoid that it's best to just leave it, as suggested, or else make a > serious and well-founded claim and illustrate how it impacts GNU and > its functions. I think anything else at this moment in time is simply > detrimental to GNU and any discourse around it. Maybe this would be a reasonable request if we ignored all the context of what has transpired in the past month or so (which, we must not forget, was just the straw that broke the camel's back after *years* of problematic behavior), but given the context I think this is nothing more than gaslighting. There is no honest need for me, or anyone else, to rehash the issues as if they haven't already been cited numerous times by others. Everything is already out on the table. - Dave
Re: Is negative publicity always harmful? (was: Women and GNU and RMS)
On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 13:26 -0500, Thompson, David wrote: > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:59 PM Brandon Invergo > wrote: > > Can we just leave it there? > > I don't think we can. RMS is GNU's leader, and his public comments, > whether or not they are specifically about free software, are > relevant > to GNU. Some of us are tired of looking the other way. "Looking the other way" is a spurious allegation, implying a wrong is being committed that is willfully overlooked and furthermore implying that those disagreeing or unaware are complicit in the wrong. Unless such assertions are backed up they remain speculation that cannot be falsified against or reasoned about, and will continue to linger and damage GNU. To avoid that it's best to just leave it, as suggested, or else make a serious and well-founded claim and illustrate how it impacts GNU and its functions. I think anything else at this moment in time is simply detrimental to GNU and any discourse around it. -Andreas
Re: Is negative publicity always harmful? (was: Women and GNU and RMS)
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 02:29:31PM -0500, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > Non-GNU topics are off-topic for GNU lists, it is that simple. I suppose we agree here, but are you sure you replied to the correct message? David used the word "GNU" twice in his, so I can only assume it must have been somewhat related to GNU. Andreas
Re: Is negative publicity always harmful? (was: Women and GNU and RMS)
Non-GNU topics are off-topic for GNU lists, it is that simple. Peoples personal opinions are just that, if you wish to discuss it with a person it is best done so with the person.
Re: Is negative publicity always harmful? (was: Women and GNU and RMS)
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:59 PM Brandon Invergo wrote: > > > As I previously requested, please let's drop discussions of particular > people, especially when it comes to what they said or did outside of > GNU. I know you are not attacking but standing in rms's defense, > however at this point it's only going to stir up dying embers. > > Can we just leave it there? I don't think we can. RMS is GNU's leader, and his public comments, whether or not they are specifically about free software, are relevant to GNU. Some of us are tired of looking the other way. - Dave
Re: Is negative publicity always harmful? (was: Women and GNU and RMS)
Dmitry Alexandrov writes: > Sandra Loosemore wrote: >> The absolute worst thing the public-facing representative of *any* >> organization can do is bring negative publicity to the organization >> about things that are irrelevant or contrary to the organization's >> mission. > > Iʼm afraid, you conflated two points. Publicity that undermine the > core competency of an organization — yes, is perhaps is the most > harmful thing for it. > > While negative publicity on irrelevant topics is either much less > harmful, or sometimes even beneficial. > >> As a result of RMS's comments, all of a sudden the public >> conversation about the GNU project was not about how good our >> software is and how free software is taking over the world and >> beneficial to everybody > > Dr. Stallman has been always, in almost every his speech, pointed out, > that in terms of publicity everything is still so bad, that he has to > struggle to make it known that GNU and free software movement in > general merely exist. And that they are not the same as Linux® and > ‘open source’, in particular. > > Under that conditions, any kind of public attention to GNU should be > welcoming. > >> It's been a public relations disaster for the GNU project. :-( > > Time will tell. As I previously requested, please let's drop discussions of particular people, especially when it comes to what they said or did outside of GNU. I know you are not attacking but standing in rms's defense, however at this point it's only going to stir up dying embers. Can we just leave it there? -- -brandon
