Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Brandon Invergo]

Ruben Safir writes:

> The hell with that.  She and our Bordeaux fiends should be sued and
> shunned.
>
> Get on the right side of the ethics here.
>
> I don't care about your threats of moderation.

I understand your points, but right now I have zero tolerance for this
low level of discourse.  We will never reach any resolution if we
continue in this way.  I've put you under moderation.  I will happily
let through any messages from you that do not contain attacks and abuse.

--
-brandon

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 09:46:42AM +, Brandon Invergo wrote:
> 
> Ruben Safir writes:
> 
> > On 11/3/19 11:51 PM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> >> This is unkind and unconstructive.
> >
> > No it is not.  It is SPOT ON and constructive.
> >
> > Lieing about Richard Stallman, that is unkind and fucked up.
> >
> > I don't care what your moderation is.  I will just copy to places that
> > don't moderate this truly fucked up situation where RMS was ruthlessly
> > attacked, and kicked out of his home at the age of 66 becuase of vicious
> > lies like the kind that Sandra Loosemore (my God strike out her name)
> > spread around
> 
> I was asleep when all of this went down, but I agree with Mike.  This
> kind of approach doesn't belong in a discussion.  You are welcome to
> post it elsewhere, but we won't have it on this list.  I understand your
> position here, but please find a way to make your point without
> insulting others.  Please consider this your only warning: if you
> continue to be abusive, I will put you under moderation.
> 


The hell with that.  She and our Bordeaux fiends should be sued and
shunned.

Get on the right side of the ethics here.

I don't care about your threats of moderation.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 09:41:13AM +, Brandon Invergo wrote:
> Hi Kaz,
> 
> Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) writes:
> 
> > I'm afraid I don't agree. Firstly, anyone who is grown up and halfway
> > intelligent already knows that those comments don't have anything
> > to do with the GNU project; and that there is a lot more to
> > GNU than just one person.
> 
> This, in particular, is very unkind.  Do not assume that someone is
> unintelligent just because they hold different views.  You can make
> exactly the same point without saying that.
> 


No, it can not be, actually.  He is right.  An adult person of normal
intelligence knows that the statements had nothing to do with GNU and is
not representitive of GNU.

This is Aximatic.

The tacket being used it wave your hands around and make absurd
statements and hope they stick.  It needs to be reinforced that not only
are the lies being said about RMS untrue, but everyone understands this,
because it is obvious.  We will not be rattled by Fear, Uncertainty and
Doubt that feeds the lies and purposefully exagerations being made by
RMS's enemies.

To quote an old freind, "We are not affected by your Jedi mind tricks",
or if you perfer, "We find these truths self evident", that exploring the
maturations of the term "assualt" with regard to specifics of events
does not imply in any way the rape of children, nor does the princple of 
freedom of thought and the pursuit of truth, or the criticle principles 
of due process allow for us, as responsible adults, to concede rational 
response for childish hysteria.

PERIOD


It is what it is.  It is a childish attack on the reputtion of RMS,
which tries to exploit RMS's disabilities to discredit him.  It is
disgusting behavior, and there is no room here for compromise,
negotiation, of civility.

The only one who has been raped here was RMS, and those of us who depend
on him.


Ruben


-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com 

DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive 
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com 

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps, 
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Alexandre François Garreau  [2019-11-04 10:44]:
> > Some people are more emotional, some less, some have
> > traumas, and some don't have, we all react differently.
> 
> Yes, but keep in mind what could be understood (in both senses: receptor and 
> emitter).  Insult are a convention, so are all emotional charges.  Insults 
> are 
> just an extreme of this.

Good points!

It is as you said that particular society will respond to particular
words by particular emotional charge. General public response may be
caused by using certain wordings and expressions.

Thus who control keywords that are bringing emotional charges can
control the public opinion.

Media is profiting out of it. That group is causing the problems. They
make money on scandals.

Thus for GNU governance, one shall strive being rational and avoid
acting based solely on emotional charges, but on reason, evidences,
facts.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jose E. Marchesi]

Finally, may I also suggest that everyone take a self-imposed cool-off
period?  I think everyone would benefit from taking some time to
reflect, regrouping and approaching any further discussion with clear
heads.

Yeah, and to hack some free software.
That's what we are here for, after all.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Brandon Invergo]

Ruben Safir writes:

> On 11/3/19 11:51 PM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
>> This is unkind and unconstructive.
>
> No it is not.  It is SPOT ON and constructive.
>
> Lieing about Richard Stallman, that is unkind and fucked up.
>
> I don't care what your moderation is.  I will just copy to places that
> don't moderate this truly fucked up situation where RMS was ruthlessly
> attacked, and kicked out of his home at the age of 66 becuase of vicious
> lies like the kind that Sandra Loosemore (my God strike out her name)
> spread around

I was asleep when all of this went down, but I agree with Mike.  This
kind of approach doesn't belong in a discussion.  You are welcome to
post it elsewhere, but we won't have it on this list.  I understand your
position here, but please find a way to make your point without
insulting others.  Please consider this your only warning: if you
continue to be abusive, I will put you under moderation.

Also, speaking as a reader and not a moderator, will everyone please
stop getting bogged down in pedantic discussion of the meaning of words?
It's tiresome and unproductive.

Finally, may I also suggest that everyone take a self-imposed cool-off
period?  I think everyone would benefit from taking some time to
reflect, regrouping and approaching any further discussion with clear
heads.

--
-brandon

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Brandon Invergo]

Hi Kaz,

Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) writes:

> I'm afraid I don't agree. Firstly, anyone who is grown up and halfway
> intelligent already knows that those comments don't have anything
> to do with the GNU project; and that there is a lot more to
> GNU than just one person.

This, in particular, is very unkind.  Do not assume that someone is
unintelligent just because they hold different views.  You can make
exactly the same point without saying that.

--
-brandon

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Alexandre François Garreau  [2019-11-04 09:58]:
> The problem here is maybe less (or not for all) linked with
> punishment than with image.  It seems, in this increasingly
> superficial society, people want to be proud of their celebrity for
> what they symbolize instead of what they do.

For Richard, I am not defending Richard for reasons of him being
celebrity.

I am not "proud" on Richard, I don't know why would I be, I never was
thinking of it neither feeling anything about it. I know that I owe to
Dr. Stallman, at least I owe him what he teach me through his speeches
and videos, and that is to be correct person. 

Neither I am speaking for "symbol" of Dr. Stallman.

In defense of Dr. Richard Stallman, I do not defend Stallman, I defend
estabished legal justice system, which is not perfect, but is way more
perfect than mob justice system.

In defense of Dr. Richard Stallman, I defend free speech, and that
means for everybody. As free speech is protected, and that means it is
protected by legal justice system.

And I stand for facts, as "what they do" how you said, and you implied
to what Dr. Stallman does, and that implies that he expressed few
opinions, I think that if one is accusing anybody, one should bring
evidences to show that there was harm done, and person harmed should
appear and make the harm evident. And if there is no harm, nonsense
should stop, accusations should stop and the mob and media shall stop
spreading humiliating fake news.

In all remarks that media was mischaracterizing Stallman's opinions,
he was either making remarks to journalism, and was standing for just
reporting, he strived to point out false accusations in newspapers or
articles.

It is character of programmers or hackers to look into grammar
accurately, and to think logically, analyse, dissect, and strive for
exactness. So far I know, Richard was reading articles and publishing
his public opinions and those all based on such analysis, exactness,
attempts to correct some journalistic reporting, attempts to call for
just system, he basically always strived to minimize the mob justice.

When making laws, law makers have duty and obligation to make sure
that words are expressed concisely, that everything is very clear and
that future interpretation of the law cannot possibly include innocent
people or open a loophole for such abuse. That is what Richard was
speaking about, he is picky to definitions, words and how words are
used. He does not like words being used out of the context.

Then he defended realistically Professor Minsky, and somebody got an
emotional reaction, Selam published it on Internet, and there it was,
the never expected Spanish Inquisition to cancel Richard down. My god.

He defended Minsky for knowing Minsky, who he is, who we are to tell
that he is not right?

At least one other person stands as witness to Stallman, saying that
Minsky is not guilty: https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/

Now when there is evidence that Minsky was not guilty, and that
defense of Minsky's honour by Dr. Stallman is based on their personal
relation -- after looking into all that, I see absolutely nothing
wrong.

I see exactly what Richard pointed out, inflation of accusations, this
time against Stallman.

I can clearly look what is going on, the only thing that I do not know
is who is really benefiting of GNU people getting divided on political
correctness.

The party that I can find that is benefiting from such rumors on
Internet is media in general.

It is my feeling that media does know which keywords to watch, and if
anybody have mentioned a keyword "Epstein" -- then anything connected
and related to Epstein becomes a media product, and such is being
sold.

Example is Stallman, as he made few opinions about his fellow Minsky,
in one way or other connected to Epstein.

Example is also Bill Gates, look at this Internet search:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bill+gates+epstein=v154-3am=news

Formula to get media attention and to sell media to emotional mob is
simple:

1. Find the current keywords, find the trend that is attracting mob.

2. Find celebrities who have expressed any opinion related to current
   controversial keywords or have been in connection with them.

3. Twist words to raise more emotional charge, and sell articles for
   money and profit.

4. Call for more emotional charges, and sell more articles for money
   and profit.

5. Go to step number 2. above and repeat the process.

6. If the trending keyword such as Epstein or pedophilia is exhausted,
   find a new keyword, and do the drill all over again.



Jean

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 09:13:10 CET, vous avez écrit :
> * Alexandre François Garreau  [2019-11-04 05:26]:
> > Hi, I like discussion.  This so because I like language.  And therefore,
> > meaning.
> > 
> > Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 04:32:04 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> > > Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.
> > 
> > I think you’re wrong about lunatism.  I think though mob attacks can seem
> > really lunatic, they’re made by disinformed persons that tend to keep a
> > sort of consistence within the few, probably unsufficient, knowledge they
> > have about the situations they get in.
> 
> People who use computers, who know how to use Internet search engines,

Which ones? what about bubbles? what about *bad* search engines (that don’t 
come up with relevant results)?

> who know how to read

Sadly, it seems to me the previous events widely showed this is not granted.

> and who are just will find the facts and get
> informed and verify information.

Therefore won’t.

> * Overview of noun lunatic
> 
> The noun lunatic has 2 senses (no senses from tagged texts)
> 1. lunatic, madman, maniac -- (an insane person)
> 2. daredevil, madcap, hothead, swashbuckler, lunatic, harum-scarum -- (a
> reckless impetuous irresponsible person)

OH it’s different from french (lunatic means “who change its mind easily” in 
French).  I was wrong :/

We are an international community, let’s keep in mind insults and emotional 
charges don’t translate well across languages (Oliva showed it during the 
abort joke debate, after all)

> In my opinion GNU project shall simply stay where it is, with its good
> directions and FSF campaigns, and shall restrict any kind of proposals
> to call-out anybody by public shaming and calling attention to wrong
> behavior. Why? Because that is not a justice system, and no non-profit
> organization shall serve the justice in that way for the reason it is
> not a court of justice.
> 
> One way to do that is to recognize if somebody is being publicly
> shamed for some speech or behavior which was not anyway connected to
> GNU project or FSF, and then to reject such complaints and route
> people to legal justice system. As if anybody was harmed by somebody's
> behavior, they have justice system as a recourse. If anybody was
> harmed by somebody's speech, they have legal justice system as a
> recourse.

The problem here is maybe less (or not for all) linked with punishment than 
with image.  It seems, in this increasingly superficial society, people want to 
be proud of their celebrity for what they symbolize instead of what they do.

This is a sad thing.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Alexandre François Garreau  [2019-11-04 09:35]:
> Words carry connotation, emotional charge.  For instance, look at
> these, that could very well be synonyms:
> unstable/versatile/flexible/dynamic, stable/rigid/ static.  They
> could have some nuance, but in some contexts they will mean the same
> thing.

Emotions are carried by persons, each person is different, it is not
carried by words. Some people are more emotional, some less, some have
traumas, and some don't have, we all react differently.

It is common agreement all over the world that insults and rude
expressions intended to offend or hurt and profanity are not part of
good behavior.

Yet avoiding to use certain words or speech of any kind for reason
that somebody will get emotional charge is wrong.

To behave responsibly also means for me not to release my emotional
charges onto other others. So even if somebody insults me, I should
control my emotions and stay calm, as that is first good for
me. Others are passing by, we observe the world.

Yet we cannot possibly ask for everybody to suddenly be emotionally
free relaxed and not to get offended, for that reason we better strive
to be kind in all dealings with members of any kind of community.

The pattern of being kind does not mean it is tolerating pattern. It
shall not justify or tolerate irrational emotional call-outs
(take-down attempts), as what we discussed earlier. That exactly
happened because of the tolerance.

In my opinion, FSF shall remove those Guix statements from Guix pages,
as that is defamation by its definition, it is irrational and
emotional and does not fit to Guix well.

Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

Defamation (sometimes known as calumny, vilification, or traducement)
is the oral or written communication of a false statement about
another that unjustly harms their reputation, and usually constitutes
a tort or a crime.[1] In several countries, including South Korea[2]
and Sweden,[3] communicating a true statement can also be considered
defamation.

FSF shall not allow attempts of crime to take place on Guix website,
as it is GNU project and if that is allowed, it creates potential
legal weakness and collapse of many projects.

To give a good example of it, Ludovic Courtès could be sued and Guix
project could collapse.

Defamation and public shaming shall be removed and not tolerated on
any of GNU project pages.

Jean

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Words carry connotation, emotional charge.  For instance, look at these, that 
could very well be synonyms: unstable/versatile/flexible/dynamic, stable/rigid/
static.  They could have some nuance, but in some contexts they will mean the 
same thing.

Yet, often, some are meliorative, others pejoratives, some neuters (that’s 
useful for purely rational, non-biased discussion (but sometimes, or actually, 
quite often, we have axioms, principles (we need them to take decisions in the 
end, otherwise everything is meaningless), and we may *choose* to be biased 
(in favor of free software for instance))).

Sometimes, if you decompose the word, and take its definition (“stuff (don’t) 
change”) it will get more neuter, or at least change connotation.  Depending 
on its emotional charge, it might be worth, or not.  That’s a choice.

Kindness is useful, often.  Insults are sometimes too, but more rarely: more 
for pure enemies (but in a collaborative project, you ought to have few), or 
for friends you actually really understand.

Please don’t insult newcomers.  It may make them leave, and it may even do 
worse for you: not succeed to make them leave.  And you’ll be uncomfortable, 
or the opposite, but still.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Alexandre François Garreau  [2019-11-04 06:30]:
> I don’t like the term “bigot”.  It seems mainly used against individual, for 
> individual purposes.  Not a very social term.  I do not like “hysterical” 
> neither, hovewer, but I don’t want it “removed from language”, just not (at 
> least less) used as an insult as it was for the reasons it was.  Anyway won’t 
> cancel words, only usage, and that’s up to locutors.  Will come with time.  
> Or 
> not.

Words are words, they shall have no emotions, but actually are more
powerful than any weapon.

To use words when it is proper is just to do. Even profanity may be
just in certain times and places.

To use words as insults is not right on this type of public
discussion, because we are here users of free software. We have got a
gift from RMS, GNU, FSF and majority of people who are here are
contributors, we have got their gifts, and shall be at least that much
thankful so not to insult anybody any here.

Instead of using "bigot", which is actually just a word with the
meaning, one could say "prejudiced and intolerant of the opinion (make
it specific) differing from his own" -- basically one can tell the
same by better explaining what is meant with "bigot". Take almost any
term that looks not proper, find the definition and use better
explanatory words with specific pointing and it will look nicer to
public. 

bigot

* Overview of noun bigot

The noun bigot has 1 sense (no senses from tagged texts)
1. bigot -- (a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing 
from his own)

To be tolerant with somebody's opinion does not mean to accept the
opinion or share the opinion. It means showing respect for the other
side to express the opinion, understand the opinion and then being
able to let it be.

Jean

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Ruben Safir  [2019-11-04 06:01]:
> On 11/3/19 11:51 PM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> > This is unkind and unconstructive.
> 
> No it is not.  It is SPOT ON and constructive.

Ruben, to tell to people "sod off" is not kind as it is British slang
for: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Sod%20off

> Lieing about Richard Stallman, that is unkind and fucked up.

I totally agree with you, only that we shall try to express ourselves
as gentlemen.

Jean

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Alexandre François Garreau  [2019-11-04 05:26]:
> Hi, I like discussion.  This so because I like language.  And therefore, 
> meaning.
> 
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 04:32:04 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> > Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.
> 
> I think you’re wrong about lunatism.  I think though mob attacks can seem 
> really lunatic, they’re made by disinformed persons that tend to keep a sort 
> of consistence within the few, probably unsufficient, knowledge they have 
> about 
> the situations they get in.

People who use computers, who know how to use Internet search engines,
who know how to read and who are just will find the facts and get
informed and verify information.

There are people who do not act by information, for which being
informed or being dis-informed really does not matter.

You are rational person. Why I say so? Because you are referring to
the fact that people are supposed to make their decisions or incite
actions on informed decisions.

You have just mentioned it. But there are types of people who are not
responding to being informed. They may even have all the knowledge
necessary, and will not regard the knowledge, facts, arguments as
being valid, because this type of people regards only emotions or
feelings of justice to be valid and to have the ultimate priority
before any facts.

And that is why lynching was prohibited!

Because carrying on with the justice based on emotions and feelings
does not bring any justice about, but injustice.

Political movements all over the world are using the phenomena that
one part of people may be moved by emotions, by feelings, by apparent
public propaganda what should be just, and they are inciting
divisions and wars, this is happening all over the world.

Lynching is form of ochlocracy. Ochlocracy is rule of government by
mob or mass of people.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching

Lynching is a premeditated extrajudicial killing by a group. It is
most often used to characterize informal public executions by a mob in
order to punish an alleged transgressor, convicted transgressor, or to
intimidate a group. It can also be an extreme form of informal group
social control, and it is often conducted with the display of a public
spectacle (often in the form of hanging) for maximum intimidation.
Instances of lynchings and similar mob violence can be found in every
society.

We do not speak of lynching here, but we do have analogy at hand. The
analogy is to the call-out culture.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call-out_culture#Cancel_Culture

Call-out culture (also known as outrage culture) is a form of public
shaming that aims to hold individuals and groups accountable for their
actions by calling attention to behavior that is perceived to be
problematic, usually on social media. A variant of the term, cancel
culture, describes a form of boycott in which someone (usually a
celebrity) who has shared a questionable or unpopular opinion, or has
had behavior that is perceived to be either offensive or problematic
called out on social media is "canceled"; they are completely
boycotted by many of their followers or supporters, often leading to
massive declines in celebrities' (almost always social media
personalities) careers and fanbase.

I think that defines pretty well what we are dealing here.

More citations from Ochlocracy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy

Ochlocracy (Greek: ὀχλοκρατία, romanized: okhlokratía; Latin:
ochlocratia) or mob rule is the rule of government by mob or a mass of
people, or, the intimidation of legitimate authorities. As a
pejorative for majoritarianism, it is akin to the Latin phrase mobile
vulgus, meaning "the fickle crowd", from which the English term "mob"
originally was derived in the 1680s.

The above terms are well connected to what we have here at hand.

There is GNU project and FSF, which was and is and will be
success. There was already well established organization, and there is
founder who as a person is very kind and always strive for justice by
all means. A thinker, forerunner, precursor, visionary.

There is observable phenomena that people who tend to join the
call-out culture, or mob incited justice, that such will not regard
any information, as they do not care about information, facts or
evidences.

I have installed wordnut package in my Emacs so to have quick access
to local Wordnet, and there is also online list of dictionaries on a
press of a button.

* Overview of noun lunatic

The noun lunatic has 2 senses (no senses from tagged texts)
1. lunatic, madman, maniac -- (an insane person)
2. daredevil, madcap, hothead, swashbuckler, lunatic, harum-scarum -- (a 
reckless impetuous irresponsible person)


* Overview of adj impetuous

The adj impetuous has 2 senses (first 1 from tagged texts)
1. (2) hotheaded, impulsive, impetuous, madcap, tearaway, brainish -- 
(characterized by undue haste and lack of thought or deliberation; "a hotheaded 
decision"; "liable 

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On 11/4/19 12:49 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:46:36 CET, vous avez écrit :
>> On 11/4/19 12:45 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
>>> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
 On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> I don’t like the term 
> “bigot”.  It seems mainly used
> against individual, for individual purposes.  Not a very social term.

 It is the cornerstone of Jewish ethics.
>>>
>>> What?
>>
>> https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/speech-and-lashon-harah
> 
> Ah, I thought you talked about the usage of the word “bigot”.  What’s 
> the 
> relationship then?
> 


No - bigot is the term I use for someone who objects to the use of the
term "hysterical".  It is someone just spoiling for an excuse to call
the gender card.  I have no use for that kind of bigotry in my life.
People like that I boycott.

-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:46:36 CET, vous avez écrit :
> On 11/4/19 12:45 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> > Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
> >> On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> >>> I don’t like the term “bigot”.  It seems mainly used
> >>> against individual, for individual purposes.  Not a very social term.
> >> 
> >> It is the cornerstone of Jewish ethics.
> > 
> > What?
> 
> https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/speech-and-lashon-harah

Ah, I thought you talked about the usage of the word “bigot”.  What’s the 
relationship then?

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On 11/4/19 12:45 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
>> On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
>>> I don’t like the term “bigot”.  It seems mainly used 
>>> against
>>> individual, for individual purposes.  Not a very social term.
>>
>> It is the cornerstone of Jewish ethics.
> 
> What?
> 

https://torah.org/series/halashon/
-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On 11/4/19 12:45 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
>> On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
>>> I don’t like the term “bigot”.  It seems mainly used 
>>> against
>>> individual, for individual purposes.  Not a very social term.
>>
>> It is the cornerstone of Jewish ethics.
> 
> What?
> 
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/speech-and-lashon-harah

-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
> On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> > I don’t like the term “bigot”.  It seems mainly used against
> > individual, for individual purposes.  Not a very social term.
> 
> It is the cornerstone of Jewish ethics.

What?

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> I don’t like the term “bigot”.  It seems mainly used against 
> individual, for 
> individual purposes.  Not a very social term.  


It is the cornerstone of Jewish ethics.

-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 05:51:07 CET Mike Gerwitz a écrit :
> Ruben:
> 
> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 22:32:04 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote:
> > Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.  Your
> > posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
> > the intelligence of the GNU community.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > I'm telling you what most of us who are adults understand and we
> > feel attacked by you, and Sandra.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Sod off ...  GNU has nothing to be ashamed for and neither does RMS.
> 
> This is unkind and unconstructive.

I understand “hysterical” sounds insulting (though it might be less, according 
recent clarifications)… thought… how “lunitics”, “feel attacked” and “nothing 
to be ashamed” are unkind or unconstructive?

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 05:40:11 CET, vous avez écrit :
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> > Hi, I like discussion.  This so because I like language.  And therefore,
> > meaning.
> 
> Try the term Loshen HaRah
> 
> it is Hebrew

Found it.  Interesting.  Thank you for readings.

The vocallic transcription was different on Wikipedia.  Damn I should learn to 
read hebrew.  I just learnt arabic and russian, and some letters seems to look 
something alike… and I see they have too numbers and meanings… damn I love 
that.

> > But now about “hysterical”, which has been hinted several times by several
> > people (at least 3, maybe including me, I forgot) as a sexist insult.
> 
> I want you to post that all over the internet.  Ruben is a bigot because
> he used the word Hysterical correctly.  Some people misuse the term
> "Intellectual Property", and others think "Hysterical" should be removed
> from language.

I don’t like the term “bigot”.  It seems mainly used against individual, for 
individual purposes.  Not a very social term.  I do not like “hysterical” 
neither, hovewer, but I don’t want it “removed from language”, just not (at 
least less) used as an insult as it was for the reasons it was.  Anyway won’t 
cancel words, only usage, and that’s up to locutors.  Will come with time.  Or 
not.

So I don’t agree with this sentence.  I only stated my opinion, about a word, 
not about you (don’t worry), and I didn’t even said to stop using a word x) 
actually maybe I said “stop insulting”, at least… but that maybe have been 
achieved through clarification?

I’ve always fought insults by understanding)

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Mike Gerwitz]

On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 23:59:02 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote:
> I don't care what your moderation is.  I will just copy to places that
> don't moderate
[...]

My intent is not to censor you.  I would prefer that you be able to
communicate your thoughts openly.  I'm trying to help ensure that you
can do that.

Can you please compromise on the way you're phrasing certain things so
that the substance of your messages can still be heard by others?  You
will reach people much more easily if you don't have to resort to
copying your message other places.

As it stands now, the tone of your message gets in the way.  I end up
not reading your messages because of it.  If enough people are doing
this, then you are not effectively defending rms.

-- 
Mike Gerwitz


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On 11/3/19 11:51 PM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> This is unkind and unconstructive.

No it is not.  It is SPOT ON and constructive.

Lieing about Richard Stallman, that is unkind and fucked up.

I don't care what your moderation is.  I will just copy to places that
don't moderate this truly fucked up situation where RMS was ruthlessly
attacked, and kicked out of his home at the age of 66 becuase of vicious
lies like the kind that Sandra Loosemore (my God strike out her name)
spread around

-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: “Hysterical” [Was: Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)]

[Ruben Safir]

On 11/3/19 11:38 PM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> The question is then: what does it mean? crazy? or simply you don’t like 
> the 
> person? or nothing?


It means that your working from an emotional framework where one acts
irrationally... to the point by losing the ability to reason.

like in a mob ready to perform a lynching..


-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: “Hysterical” [Was: Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)]

[Ruben Safir]

On 11/3/19 11:38 PM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Yet, if we take a scientific approach to language,

Not interested.  I used the right word in the right place for the right
meaning. I make plenty of gramatical errors, and this is not one.

-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Mike Gerwitz]

Ruben:

On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 22:32:04 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote:
> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.  Your
> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
> the intelligence of the GNU community.

[...]

> I'm telling you what most of us who are adults understand and we
> feel attacked by you, and Sandra.  

[...]

> Sod off ...  GNU has nothing to be ashamed for and neither does RMS.

This is unkind and unconstructive.

We have chosen to remove blanket moderation from this list, but we do so
hoping that we can trust people to carry out appropriate discussions.

Please stop.  I understand that you find certain statements to be
upsetting, but words like these do nothing but undermine whatever point
you're trying to make.

-- 
Mike Gerwitz
Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer
GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B  2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss)]

In light of the changing shape of the list's moderation,
the following is a re-post of a message that was previously
rejected as being flamey or whatever.

Well, is it?

There is no hot temper behind it; I had it in draft form
overnight, mulled over and reworded some things the next day.

If anyone thinks it should have been rejected, I welcome any
comment to that effect and am grateful for any justifications
and explanations.

Text in sequare brackets is an annotation I'm adding now.

On 2019-10-30 16:22, Sandra Loosemore wrote:

IMO, to regain control of our public image, I think we have to take
some explicit and public steps to disassociate the GNU project from
RMS's comments.


Hi Sandra,

Outside observer here.

I'm afraid I don't agree. Firstly, anyone who is grown up and halfway
intelligent already knows that those comments don't have anything
to do with the GNU project; and that there is a lot more to
GNU than just one person.

  [Hopefully is it clear here that I'm not saying anything like
   that the person I'm replying to herself isn't halfway intelligent
   or grown up, which would be nonsensical to say the least.
   I agree with the basic need for organizations to be dissociated
   from the personal views of individual members. But such legal
   disclaimers are mainly for the dimwitted.]

In other words, GNU and the FSF are not currently "associated" with
those comments in any way (not in any way that is fair and reasonable),
so there is nothing to undo.

So that is to say, "dissociate from the comments" is a phrase that
doesn't refer to any concrete action in the world, just some words
to try to persuade some people who allegedly hold some false belief.

More importantly, *explicit* steps, as you say, to dissociate from
anything involve *mentioning* what you're dissociating from.
That just dredges up the matter and draws attention to it, delaying
it from being laid to rest.

This is closely related to the 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect


The best way is to stop talking about the whole matter, and just
take a reactive strategy toward any loose ends. If some outsider brings
up some views such as that GNU or FSF are tarnished by some past events
involving individual behavior, it may be appropriate to react to that 
swiftly.


Basically, take an evidence-based, empirical approach: if you see
concrete evidence that someone is harboring or promoting a false view
about the organization, then take some explicit steps. If nobody seems
to be doing that, then there is no actual problem; focus your
attention somewhere else.

It's like bug fixing.

Don't make up some angel-on-pin's-head scenario in your head based on 
what
some ISO or IEEE document says or does not say and go off making 
changes.

Insist on a repro test case.

And, of course, not bringing up a matter doesn't imply that anyone is
taking a particular side in the matter. Yes, of course someone usually
benefits to some extent when some matter isn't discussed; but that 
doesn't

mean that the reticence is intended for their benefit.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Hi, I like discussion.  This so because I like language.  And therefore, 
> meaning.
> 


Try the term Loshen HaRah

it is Hebrew

> 
> But now about “hysterical”, which has been hinted several times by several 
> people (at least 3, maybe including me, I forgot) as a sexist insult.  


I want you to post that all over the internet.  Ruben is a bigot because
he used the word Hysterical correctly.  Some people misuse the term
"Intellectual Property", and others think "Hysterical" should be removed
from language.

Not my problem...

Bigots and tyrants will always try to bend language to justify evil
means.

Ruben


-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com 

DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive 
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com 

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps, 
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

“Hysterical” [Was: Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)]

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 05:34:26 CET, vous avez écrit :
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> > But now about “hysterical”,

> French I have no idea about.

I think it’s the same in both.

> Regardless how many times it is said otherwise, it doesn't change that
> Hysterical is a legitiamte and correct term for use in English...

Yet, if we take a scientific approach to language, that any linguist will take, 
we shall not take a purist approach that a term is correct and another is not, 
that anything ought to be banned.  So…

> Hysterical is the correct term and it is not a gender term.

…if for you according your definition it is the correct word, then it is (then, 
it might be the wrong for the recipient, but at this level of analysis it’s 
out of subject).

The question is then: what does it mean? crazy? or simply you don’t like the 
person? or nothing?

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Hi, I like discussion.  This so because I like language.  And therefore, 
> meaning.
> 
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 04:32:04 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> > Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.
> 
> I think you’re wrong about lunatism.  I think though mob attacks can seem 
> really lunatic, they’re made by disinformed persons that tend to keep a sort 
> of consistence within the few, probably unsufficient, knowledge they have 
> about 
> the situations they get in.
> 
> But now about “hysterical”, 

Hysterical is the correct term and it is not a gender term.

Regardless how many times it is said otherwise, it doesn't change that
Hysterical is a legitiamte and correct term for use in English...

French I have no idea about.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Hi, I like discussion.  This so because I like language.  And therefore, 
meaning.

Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 04:32:04 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.

I think you’re wrong about lunatism.  I think though mob attacks can seem 
really lunatic, they’re made by disinformed persons that tend to keep a sort 
of consistence within the few, probably unsufficient, knowledge they have about 
the situations they get in.

But now about “hysterical”, which has been hinted several times by several 
people (at least 3, maybe including me, I forgot) as a sexist insult.  You’ve 
been noted that was biologically impossible, and said you didn’t care.

Then, what’s you’re interpretation of it? is it just a random meaningless 
insult like “asshole”, just for people you don’t like? or is it more specific? 
for instance “crazy”? as it is used often for (after all, it comes from 
psychology (though from a part of it widely acknowledged as a pseudoscience).

May I propose a popular definition?  I find this term often used to describe 
women, but not only, being considered “too angry” (as the standard for 
acceptable feminine angriness generally meet a lower threshold, I guess), up 
to becoming irrational and uncontrolable (I take that from the third 
wiktionary definition, that talks about “uncontrolable laugh”).  I often saw 
people talking about “being hysteric” (including from women, including about 
men) when someone is excessively shouting, especially when in a very acute 
manner (that might arise when the person is beyond per limits, and shout the 
loudest).  It seems really linked to voice, to me.  Yet that definition being 
popular, usually not well connected to the sexist origin (sometimes people 
aren’t even aware of), and not necessarily about women, it seems to, for 
evidence reasons of voice biological characteristics, more be prone to target 
women, based on this definition (loud acute voice).

Now, what’s your definition? why do you qualify Sandra as such?  She seems 
disgusted, maybe irrational (but you’re emotional too, here), but on the 
internet, she can’t shout…  So what makes you say that? you only excessively 
dislike/hate people being against rms? or you think she’s crazy / so much 
irrational that deserve insults? so you think being crazy or irationnal make 
you deserve insult? or do you believe there’s a situation where a person could 
receive such insults calmly and agree?

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On 11/3/19 10:42 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:32 PM Ruben Safir  wrote:
>> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.  Your
>> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
>> the intelligence of the GNU community.
> This is unkind and doesn't contribute to a constructive discussion of
> the issues at hand.


Yes it does because it is TRUE.  UNKIND is lieing about RMS.  That is
unkind.

Being hysterical, like you are being, is also flat out vicious.

Don't go throwing around moral weight here.  You have none.  Anyone who
defends the defamation of RMS is a scandral and they piss me off.

and BTW - I keep using the term Hysterical, because that is the correct
world.  Don't preach to me about kindness when you act like a ruthless
barbarian.

Ruben

-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 02:14:55PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Sandra,
> 
> On Fri, 2019-11-01 at 09:34 -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> > I'd like to clarify some things, and provide some references.  Since I 
> > sent my original post in this thread, several people have accused me of 
> > slandering or defaming RMS, lying about what he has said, making false 
> > accusations against him, repeating false media reports, and the like. 
> > Well, I am not a liar.
> > 
> > I'm aware that some news reporting and social media posts have 
> > inaccurately characterized RMS's remarks about Virginia Guiffre as a 
> > defense of Epstein.  I'm aware that is not what he actually said in that 
> > particular instance, and I have not repeated those false 
> > characterizations, or based any of my thinking on that inaccurate reporting.
> > [...]
> > Beyond the news articles,
> > there've been a *ton* of blog and social media posts trashing both
> > Stallman and the free software community for looking the other way
> > for far too long. 
> > Some of those comments have been wildly inaccurate and off-base, but 
> > there is a public perception that the problem is all of us, not just 
> > RMS.  :-(
> > 
> > I'm confident that RMS's statements on child pornography, pedophilia, 
> > etc do not reflect a consensus view of the GNU developer community.  So 
> > why can't we stand up and say that "this is not us"?  It makes no sense 
> > for us to die on this particular hill trying to defend those views or to 
> > defend having him as the public face of our organization.
> > [...]
> > for now let me just say that I enjoyed my time there 
> > and have always been grateful to RMS for finding me something useful and 
> > fun to do when I was between "real" jobs.  I don't have a grudge against 
> > him, and I'm not trying to smear him with fictional stories of things he 
> > didn't really say or do.
> 
> Thanks for saying so clearly what I believe many of us feel. 


Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.  Your
posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
the intelligence of the GNU community.

Furthermore, what she posted was irrational and not clear.

Your being dishonest.  How do you account for exagerating proven
lies, stamping them with your approval, despite that they are lies and
designed to  cause real hard to RMS, and to destroy political
discourse and free thinking?

I'm telling you what most of us who are adults understand.  People like
you are dangerous and we feel attacked by you, and Sandra, who causally
repeat lied and villianize innocent people.


> To rms his credit he did acknowledge there was a problem by resigning
> as president of the FSF. 

So this is just more lies.

He resigned because he was pressured to do so and he SAID that.

He shouldn't have resigned and the mob should have been censored

> While acknowledging and sharing your views on the public impact this
> has had on the GNU project and all of us, I still hope we can do this
> together and turn GNU around to make us all proud again to belong to
> that organization.
> 

Sod off ...  GNU has nothing to be ashamed for and neither does RMS.


-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com
Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps, but
incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:32 PM Ruben Safir  wrote:
> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.  Your
> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
> the intelligence of the GNU community.

This is unkind and doesn't contribute to a constructive discussion of
the issues at hand.

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 02:14:55PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Sandra,
> 
> On Fri, 2019-11-01 at 09:34 -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> > I'd like to clarify some things, and provide some references.  Since I 
> > sent my original post in this thread, several people have accused me of 
> > slandering or defaming RMS, lying about what he has said, making false 
> > accusations against him, repeating false media reports, and the like. 
> > Well, I am not a liar.
> > 
> > I'm aware that some news reporting and social media posts have 
> > inaccurately characterized RMS's remarks about Virginia Guiffre as a 
> > defense of Epstein.  I'm aware that is not what he actually said in that 
> > particular instance, and I have not repeated those false 
> > characterizations, or based any of my thinking on that inaccurate reporting.
> > [...]
> > Beyond the news articles,
> > there've been a *ton* of blog and social media posts trashing both
> > Stallman and the free software community for looking the other way
> > for far too long. 
> > Some of those comments have been wildly inaccurate and off-base, but 
> > there is a public perception that the problem is all of us, not just 
> > RMS.  :-(
> > 
> > I'm confident that RMS's statements on child pornography, pedophilia, 
> > etc do not reflect a consensus view of the GNU developer community.  So 
> > why can't we stand up and say that "this is not us"?  It makes no sense 
> > for us to die on this particular hill trying to defend those views or to 
> > defend having him as the public face of our organization.
> > [...]
> > for now let me just say that I enjoyed my time there 
> > and have always been grateful to RMS for finding me something useful and 
> > fun to do when I was between "real" jobs.  I don't have a grudge against 
> > him, and I'm not trying to smear him with fictional stories of things he 
> > didn't really say or do.
> 
> Thanks for saying so clearly what I believe many of us feel. 


Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.  Your
posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
the intelligence of the GNU community.

Furthermore, what she posted was irrational and not clear.

Your being dishonest.  How do you account for being exagerating proven
lies designed to  cause real hard to RMS, and that destroys political
discourse and free thinking?

I'm telling you what most of us who are adults understand and we
feel attacked by you, and Sandra.  



> To rms his credit he did acknowledge there was a problem by resigning
> as president of the FSF. 

So this is just more lies.

He resigned because he was pressured to do so and he SAID so.

He shouldn't have resigned and the mob should have been censored

> While acknowledging and sharing your views on the public impact this
> has had on the GNU project and all of us, I still hope we can do this
> together and turn GNU around to make us all proud again to belong to
> that organization.
> 

Sod off ...  GNU has nothing to be ashamed for and neither does RMS.


-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com 

DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive 
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com 

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps, 
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Mark Wielaard  [2019-11-02 17:04]:
> Thanks for saying so clearly what I believe many of us feel.

Comments on Internet clearly show that only minority of those who you
generalize as "many of us" believe that. By using generalization you
are inflating the number of people. It is simply incorrect, not
factual and not true.

And that small minority of people have got such a big slap on
Internet.

If you wish that I show you comments, let me know. I need not repeat
the links on this mailing list as it does not work to your benefit.

But I am asking you to be factual, and not to generalize.

> And for expressing why this is all so incredible hard. For many of
> us rms his Free Software vision and his early work making that
> happen have been an inspiration. And for some of us GNU has been
> like family. Although a bit of a dysfunctional family with constant
> struggles and minor (or major) quarrels about who is really
> responsible for what. For too long we have kept all that to
> ourselves, only complaining in private, not wanting to rock the boat
> or admit that our happy GNU family was actually stressing us
> out. The events from 2 months ago suddenly caused all this to become
> very public, in a way that I believe makes none of us proud.

GNU was not a project to create a happy family.

It is about free operating system.

And in any happy family you listen to your father with respect.

There is no analogy there. As a moderator, you can do something better
but play with emotions of people.

> He still volunteers as the GNU maintainer of emacs and gnustandards
> packages.

So far I know, he is founder of GNU project and father of free
software philosophy.

He does not "volunteer", he is author and founder. His participation
in a specific software project is not measure to use when thinking of
RMS. Obviously you have got things wrong, and now you are spreading
incorrect information.

Even if RMS himself would say that he is nothing else in GNU project
but "volunter" I would say it would be a ridiculous joke. 

> And the FSF is now looking for input on what the relationship with
> GNU should be with respect to fiscal sponsorship, technical
> infrastructure, promotion, copyright assignment, and volunteer
> management.

Those issues are factual and finally objects to solve, but before
solving those, one shall know where is specifically a problem. As none
of those specific problems was presented. 

> While acknowledging and sharing your views on the public impact this
> has had on the GNU project and all of us, I still hope we can do this
> together and turn GNU around to make us all proud again to belong to
> that organization.

Purpose of GNU project so far I know and understood was not to make
all of you proud. It was to create free operating system. 

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Mark Wielaard]

Hi Sandra,

On Fri, 2019-11-01 at 09:34 -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> I'd like to clarify some things, and provide some references.  Since I 
> sent my original post in this thread, several people have accused me of 
> slandering or defaming RMS, lying about what he has said, making false 
> accusations against him, repeating false media reports, and the like. 
> Well, I am not a liar.
> 
> I'm aware that some news reporting and social media posts have 
> inaccurately characterized RMS's remarks about Virginia Guiffre as a 
> defense of Epstein.  I'm aware that is not what he actually said in that 
> particular instance, and I have not repeated those false 
> characterizations, or based any of my thinking on that inaccurate reporting.
> [...]
> Beyond the news articles,
> there've been a *ton* of blog and social media posts trashing both
> Stallman and the free software community for looking the other way
> for far too long. 
> Some of those comments have been wildly inaccurate and off-base, but 
> there is a public perception that the problem is all of us, not just 
> RMS.  :-(
> 
> I'm confident that RMS's statements on child pornography, pedophilia, 
> etc do not reflect a consensus view of the GNU developer community.  So 
> why can't we stand up and say that "this is not us"?  It makes no sense 
> for us to die on this particular hill trying to defend those views or to 
> defend having him as the public face of our organization.
> [...]
> for now let me just say that I enjoyed my time there 
> and have always been grateful to RMS for finding me something useful and 
> fun to do when I was between "real" jobs.  I don't have a grudge against 
> him, and I'm not trying to smear him with fictional stories of things he 
> didn't really say or do.

Thanks for saying so clearly what I believe many of us feel. And for
expressing why this is all so incredible hard. For many of us rms his
Free Software vision and his early work making that happen have been an
inspiration. And for some of us GNU has been like family. Although a
bit of a dysfunctional family with constant struggles and minor (or
major) quarrels about who is really responsible for what. For too long
we have kept all that to ourselves, only complaining in private, not
wanting to rock the boat or admit that our happy GNU family was
actually stressing us out. The events from 2 months ago suddenly caused
all this to become very public, in a way that I believe makes none of
us proud.

To rms his credit he did acknowledge there was a problem by resigning
as president of the FSF. He still volunteers as the GNU maintainer of
emacs and gnustandards packages. He also said the way the GNU project
makes decisions needs to be changed. And the FSF is now looking for
input on what the relationship with GNU should be with respect to
fiscal sponsorship, technical infrastructure, promotion, copyright
assignment, and volunteer management.

While acknowledging and sharing your views on the public impact this
has had on the GNU project and all of us, I still hope we can do this
together and turn GNU around to make us all proud again to belong to
that organization.

Thanks,

Mark

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Florian Weimer  [2019-11-02 02:47]:
> * Jean Louis:
> 
> > But if you do so, then you are allowing one new direction in the GNU
> > project, that everyone involved in the GNU project should go around
> > GNU contributors and whoever else is related and connected to GNU to
> > see if that person did not say maybe something politically incorrect,
> > so to cancel the person, to take down the person for reasons of saying
> > something that you or anybody else thinks it was not politically
> > correct.
> 
> Not everyone.  One of Sandra's point was that our *leadership* should
> not cause entirely unrelated controversies that detract from our
> mission.

Not so. Every prominent person is target for money-making media to
make some money out of it. That is how media works, they are hungry
for blood, sex, crime. If subject is pedophilia, then anybody who is
little bit famous like RMS will become target of it.

Please see this search:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bill+gates+epstein=v154-3am=news

So Bill Gates is equally target of media for Eppstein connection.

RMS is our friend, so friends stay to friends.

Try to understand how media works, it is not just or moral necessary,
it will transmit information without integrity and accuracy.

That is exactly the basis of many of RMS's comments, he criticizes
media for incorrectness. 

RMS did not "cause" controversy.

Media is making up controvery based on current time period's trigger
keywords. They know what is trending and they are looking for anybody
famous mentioning or speaking anything related to the trending
subjects. Then they make money out of the chaos.

> This is something I fully agree with: leaders hould not cause
> problems that we wouldn't have without them.

By excercising legal free speech one is causing none problems to
anybody.

Please see:

We Need To Stop Opinion Shaming
You don't need to bash someone else's opinion in order to express yours.
https://www.theodysseyonline.com/stop-opinion-shaming

> (The fact that I do not discuss your comments regarding child abuse
> images, lynching etc. does not mean that I agree with them.)

Sure.

Let me mention one other sensitive subject of incest. Today it is not
much accepted and not legal in many countries. If we think that one
generation requires 30 years to get a child, in 50 generation that
makes about:

CL> (format t "~R" (expt 2 50))
one quadrillion, one hundred and twenty-five trillion, eight hundred
and ninety-nine billion, nine hundred and six million, eight hundred
and forty-two thousand, six hundred and twenty-four generations

which makes the number 1,125,899,906,842,624 that represent the number
of our ancestors for last 1500 years. Considering that some historical
records and estimates speak that number of people before 1500 years on
this planet was just about 200 millions, the conclusion is that we are
all inbred and that incest was quite a popular activity at the time.

Times are changing and so subjects related to sex are changing too,
let us not bash anybody for their opinions.

Jean

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Florian Weimer]

* Jean Louis:

> But if you do so, then you are allowing one new direction in the GNU
> project, that everyone involved in the GNU project should go around
> GNU contributors and whoever else is related and connected to GNU to
> see if that person did not say maybe something politically incorrect,
> so to cancel the person, to take down the person for reasons of saying
> something that you or anybody else thinks it was not politically
> correct.

Not everyone.  One of Sandra's point was that our *leadership* should
not cause entirely unrelated controversies that detract from our
mission.  This is something I fully agree with: leaders hould not
cause problems that we wouldn't have without them.

For people not in leadership positions, that is far less of a concern.
But for the health of the project, I hope that we do not continue to
tolerate positions in our midst that are antithetical to core GNU
beliefs (e.g., that copyleft is a useful default and is not evil).

The media is not always fair.  This can mean that we sometimes cannot
do what we want or what we perceive as just.  Hopefully that does not
happen often.  But sometimes, it's necessary to exercise damage
control, painful as this might be to some of us.

Similarly, when there is a irreconcilable conflict between project
contributors, it's sometimes unavoidable to tell some contributors
that we cannot continue with them.  This is always very difficult
because usually, there is plenty of blame to go around once things
have escalated thus far.  But for the project to move on, it may have
to take sides, even if the outcome is not completely fair.

> And what is politically correct is changing every few months.

The attitude towards child abuse has been fairly constant since the
70s in mainstream culture, and at least since the late 80s/early 90s
in pretty much all the LBGTQ communities (there's a reason why there's
no P there).  It's not a mere fashion statement.

> By the way, do you know that free software may be used by worst people
> on this planet? By terrorists, and all kinds of criminals, killers,
> etc. Because there is freedom zero.

Yes, and this makes the moral argument for free software suspicious.
We get away with it because so far, no major proprietary software
vendor has used restrictive software licensing to further a social
cause.  If that ever changes, we look like a bunch of nerds stuck in
the past because we use restrictive licensing to produce more publicly
available software, while someone else uses it to solve world hunger
(or whatever cause they chose).  Particularly if their approach works.

I know the reasons why free software should not restrict the act of
running a program, but they are difficult to explain.  Anyone
seriously challenged on that front will have to resort to
technicalities.  Once you need to resort to free speech arguments, you
are likely defending the otherwise indefensible.  Most people outside
the U.S. will find that rather alien, and many in the U.S. too.

(The fact that I do not discuss your comments regarding child abuse
images, lynching etc. does not mean that I agree with them.)

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

He changed his mind since then.

https://www.stallman.org/archives/2019-sep-dec.html#14_September_2019_(Sex_between_an_adult_and_a_child_is_wrong)

Yet that looked as “excentrical” as his other uncommon views (about 
necrophilia, bestiality, etc. etc.), and was drown into these until now: too 
bad they become so publicized when he doesn’t support them anymore.

Yet I’d like to note that doesn’t change that fact: he didn’t defend 
*exploitation* as you said, as coercion, rape, pedophilia, doesn’t imply 
exploitation.  He even clearly stated in one of your quotes that he was 
against coercion.  And exploitation is coercion.  So it’s not logical.

The main people concern is he was saying pedophilia was not implying coercion 
but could imply consent.  He wasn’t even talking about rape.

Note also that “sex work” imply money (otherwise it’s simply slavery (yet both 
work and slavery can be bad, as work as already been described as a form of 
slavery)), and a teenager is more likely to deal with money than a child, so 
that might explain the supposition.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le jeudi 31 octobre 2019 11:51:12 CET, vous avez écrit :
> Did you see in that message calling people "old white men"? Based upon
> your own standards of what is kind and what not, it is kind to call
> "old white men" but it is not kind to respond to such allegations?

Indeed not.  Because “old white men” is purely factual, while “hysterical” is 
insulting and anti-scientifically based on pseudo-science psychanalitic 
analysis of women basing their psychological problems origin in their sex.

Youth [Was: Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)]

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le vendredi 1 novembre 2019, 17:27:53 CET Sandra Loosemore a écrit :
> On 11/1/19 3:32 AM, Andreas Enge wrote:
> > Do you have ideas on how to change that, maybe on a per-package basis?
> > For instance, did you experience things in GCC/Binutils or in other
> > environments that you think might help to attract more women, or more
> > generally to make diverse groups of potential contributors feel more
> > welcome?
> 
> I've thought about this and discussed it with other CodeSourcery people
> from time to time in the past, but we've pretty much come up blank.  It
> might help if I personally pursued a more visible role in the community
> so I could act as more of a role model for other women,

Might it be that it’d be mostly related with the bad gender ratio in CS in 
general?

And, imho, maybe even more specifically in some *very specific* technical areas 
which are actually of greater importance within GNU (eg. lisp, compilers, 
languages, libraries… and not, eg. video games, internet protocols, etc.)? I’m 
quite unaware of differences of (anyway all pretty bad) ratios in differents 
areas of computing.

> Maybe people who work for other organizations who contribute regularly
> to the GNU project could look at their hiring practices and try to
> recruit and retain more female hackers?

That seems an extremely good idea.

> but all of us women who've worked specifically on the GNU
> toolchain have been older (me, Catherine Moore who is now in a
> management role, Janis Johnston who has retired, and Rhonda Wittels who
> has left the company), and we don't have any more junior female
> developers in the pipeline at present.  :-(

Bringing age parameter seems to be an extremely interesting idea here. Because 
indeed GNU, more than other projects, is a pretty legacy and old project, 
founded in the roots of software computing itself and the yet-to-be internet, 
with a big ratio of quite low-low-low-level software, more of interest at the 
time, much less hacked on (and getting popular interest) nowadays (I’m pretty 
sure there are more women working for firefox, ubuntu, etc. than even *knowing* 
that Debian, gnutls, binutils exists, their names, and what they are).

Maybe the highest level things that are rooted in GNU’s culture of lisp/
compilers/languages are actually software package managers, as GNU has knew 
quite a dozen.  And I’m pretty sure the median age in Guix project is pretty 
*much* lower than anywhere else.

And gender ratio was likely *way more bad* (yet still bad) at the time 
(because of policy and social cultures that *are* to reject, but maybe now 
partly gone) , and that might explain why it might be more bad in GNU than 
elsewhere.  Without even being related to, even unconscious, behavior of its 
members.

So my solution, and it is quite kind, welcoming, pacific, and inclusive: offer 
formation about what’s of great interest within GNU, to younger hackers, maybe 
not even yet hackers (so to overcome the still-existing bad gender ratio of 
universities, because of still bad social culture) and, instead of “diversity 
programs” that’d consist in aggressively and negatively policy our already-
there community (and risking to cristalize disagreements), we might go out and 
teach people lisp, C, compilation, interpretation, languages and such!

I’m sure “attract, or even make, younger hackers” may be a more attractive and 
unifying perspective to *all* of us.

I’m already pretty young (according the current discussions, half a dozen of 
years ago I may even have been a “child” (too bad I really didn’t become a 
fully-achieved hacker at 14 (so even more “as a child”) like Aaron Swartz), 
and I already see that, for GNU hackers, “young” is something around 40yo.  
It’s not their fault.  They all seem pretty nice.  It’s likely not because of 
their behavior, but the *reasons* why they’re here, while others not.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le jeudi 31 octobre 2019, 04:04:37 CET wayne, steve a écrit :
> Long time listener, first time caller.
> 
> Ruben, for what it's worth your frothy-at-the-mouth email filled with
> tropes of male nerd chauvinism probably isn't a great argument against
> "this community is filled with reasons for women not to get involved". That
> kind of angry rhetoric is more likely to burn bridges than build them. Just
> sayin.
> 
> I don't know this RMS fellow, but everything I have seen put out by him
> publicly demonstrates that he lacks a certain kind of social awareness and
> inner filter

Yes.  That is less political than neuropsychological/personal yet.

> really? defending child pornography publicly??

Note “child” is sometimes wrongly used to talk about post-puberian (though 
minors) humans (and I was one not so long ago, and I can say it is quite 
enerving to me to use me as political lever), and “pornography” about 
personal, private (not published) photos, or even fictional drawings.

For me putting people in prison for owning *drawings* or having photos of 
their *same-age* lovers is wrong and ought to be criticized.

And that’s a perfectly valid example of why doing so (defending blablabla) 
SHALL be acceptable.

And he did that personally, on his website, not GNU’s.

And so few people have the courage doing this (as pedophilia is so widely used 
as strawman to restrict people’s freedom and sustain first-forms of censorship 
and repression (like Australia did)) that it is not acceptable either to 
deprieve society from one temerary individual on the ground of the fact he’s a 
leader.

He’s such because he is easily talkative about important issues, that’s why 
he’s here, and should continue doing so.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alexandre François Garreau]

Le jeudi 31 octobre 2019, 02:36:03 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> On 10/30/19 7:22 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> > And then there were RMS's disgusting public comments defending sexual
> > exploitation of minors,
> 
> There was nothing disgusting about it and he absolutely 100% wasn't
> defending sexual exploitation of minors.  It is not even near to what he
> said.

She obviously was misleaded by the medias.  Note it’s not her fault.  She 
can’t be responsible for the lies throwed at her.

Maybe, but that’s not so big, for the fact not to have took the time to check 
the sources.  But unfortunately not everybody has time and energy for that :/

That’s problem of reading and thus trusting medias.

> ***You owe RSM and all of us an apology right now***

She don’t.  She was only mistaken.  We should not attack mistaken people, but 
help them stop being mistaken.  Otherwise, we may end up alone(

> me seriously question your moral character

> It is clear to me that such a hysterical and irresponsible statement 

This is insulting (also the word “hysterical” is known for sexist origins, and 
widely used against women, that’s sad to reuse it).  You shouldn’t insult 
people, and doing so as against women, you’re sadly making her point valid :/

> Your email was offensive and disgusting.

Please don’t live by the rules of people you’re against :/ it’s not healthy.

> hiding that fact behind charges of sexism is immoral.

For instance, being immoral on the grounds that the person you’re attacking 
have been too, might be the source of infinite escalation leading to chaos you 
initially wanted to avoid.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Florian Weimer]

* Sandra Loosemore:

> It has bothered me for a long time that there are so few women 
> participating in the GNU community.   I think I might be the only female 
> maintainer on either GCC/Binutils right now (I haven't gone through the 
> lists, but the others I used to know about have stepped down).  The 
> photos of the attendees at recent Cauldrons show a group that is roughly 
> 99% male.  The steering committee is 100% male.  There is something 
> wrong with our community that we cannot attract more women, and we need 
> to fix it, because a developer community that consists almost 
> exclusively of old white men is not sustainable.

I think we have a bit more diversity than you give us credit for (of
the kind that wouldn't count in U.S. diversity statistics, flawed as
they are), but I agree that the gender imbalance is rather extreme.  I
have no idea why this is so.  I doubt we can blame that on RMS because
RMS never shows up at Cauldrons and does not interact much with the
GNU toolchain developer community directly (GNU maintainers,
i.e. those developers appointed by GNU/RMS tend to disagree about my
assessment though 8-/).

RMS also made controversial and unhelpful comments about GNU topics.
Here's an example I remember quite well:

| Shellshock just 'a blip' says Richard Stallman as Bash bug attacks
| increase

| But Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU Project and the Free
| Software Foundation, disagrees. He believes that whilst Shellshock
| is evidently a big deal, like any vulnerability it will simply be a
| “blip” in the long-term.



At the time he was talking to the press, people were still struggling
to understand the issue and deploying updates, and looking at weekend
overtime because we initially gave them a fix that didn't actually
work.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Dora Scilipoti]

Hello, Sandra,

On 11/01/2019 11:34 AM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:

> Here are some actual things that RMS has said about sexual exploitation
> of minors, with references to the sources of the quotes.

[...]

Thanks you for making it clear that you were referring to these and not
to the CSAIL issue. I see you have collected almost all of them, I
really don't think there are "many more", although I must confess that I
don't really keep track or search for them.

People evolve and grow, until the last day. When I look back into my
past to around beta release, I compare that with the present version of
me, and I can see a better person. And I hope the development of my
personality will never stop, so that there will always be an improved
new release of myself.

I would really have felt much happier if you had not forgotten to
include the last of Richard's posts among the links. The one that shows
he has gained knowledge:

__
Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex
between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it.

Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to
understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This
changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I
am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why.
___

https://www.stallman.org/archives/2019-sep-dec.html#14_September_2019_(Sex_between_an_adult_and_a_child_is_wrong)

I have deleted the links to the cheap press that followed below because
I really think that at this point it would be difficult to find a single
human being in tech that still hasn't heard about it. There is much
serious press I could link, but I really don't want to search for that
right now, and people already know about those too, anyway.

If some time you would like to talk to me, I'd be glad. After all, we
have two things in common. One is gender, and the other one is that we
were both recruited by RMS. For you, it happened when there was still
little o zero talk about the inclusion of women in tech, which in a way
shows Richard's vision and respect for women. For me, it happened much
later.

All the best,

Dora

-- 
Dora Scilipoti
GNU Education Team
gnu.org/education

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

If censored, this message will be published. If you are thinking of
censoring, instead, ask me and propose me which politically incorrect
sentences to delete from here. Please don't send my nonsensical
denigrating comments how I shall "calm down" or "think". Thank you
censor. 

* Sandra Loosemore  [2019-11-01 16:52]:
> I'd like to clarify some things, and provide some references.  Since I sent
> my original post in this thread, several people have accused me of
> slandering or defaming RMS, lying about what he has said, making false
> accusations against him, repeating false media reports, and the like. Well,
> I am not a liar.
> 
> I'm aware that some news reporting and social media posts have inaccurately
> characterized RMS's remarks about Virginia Guiffre as a defense of Epstein.
> I'm aware that is not what he actually said in that particular instance, and
> I have not repeated those false characterizations, or based any of my
> thinking on that inaccurate reporting.

Thank you Sandra, good for pointing that.

> Here are some actual things that RMS has said about sexual exploitation of
> minors, with references to the sources of the quotes.
> 
> I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children.
> 
> https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29

Actual quote is:

"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms
children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases
which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are
horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing."

I understand that it is talk about "harm" and it is connected to
legality terms and definitions in the USA. If you travel around the
world, you may find that age of consent is somewhere 13 years like in
Japan, somewhere 16 years maybe like USA, and so on. In Germany is 14
years. Do you know why is so? Because those children sexually mature
and engage in sex. Then comes the case that somewhere it is classified
as "pedophilia" and somewhere it is not. It is political debate where
RMS is engaging as observer.

Homosexuality was also classified as mental disorder from 1952 to
1973. Would RMS be talking about homosexuality in that period of time,
some people would be acting in the same manner as you are acting now,
labeling somebody for opinions on what is harm and what is not harm.

It does not apply to GNU. It is irrelevant to GNU if RMS thinks that
it doesn not harm children if they voluntarily engage in relations
which may be known in some countries as pedophilia.

There are many countries where children with 13 years engage in sexual
activities, I can also say that when they do so, it is really
questionable if there is any harm there. Go and travel around this
planet.

> https://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_2013_%28Pedophilia%29
> 
> Cody Wilson has been charged with hiring a child sex worker. Her age has not
> been announced, but I think she must surely be a teenager, not a child.
> Calling teenagers children in this context is a way of smearing people with
> normal sexual proclivities as perverts. [...]   She may have had — I expect,
> did have — entirely willing sex with him, and they would still call it
> assault.

Well said. Journalism shall be decent, it is not, it is ready to label
people for misinterpretations. Focus is on how media is
misinterpreting and labeling people who did not engage in any rape,
rather it was by mutual consent.

> https://web.archive.org/web/20181005115646/https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-jul-oct.html#23_September_2018_(Cody_Wilson)
> 
> Possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia  should
> be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of
> prejudice and narrowmindedness.

Exactly. There are much more horrific pictures which caused harm to
other human beings but pornography of whatever kind. By posessing a
picture, one does not commit any harm to anybody. Why should a person
be punished or criminalized for posession of a picture? That person
did not harm anybody.

> https://stallman.org/archives/2003-may-aug.html
> 
> There are many more of them, but you get the picture.

I get the picture in the sense that RMS talks of misinterpretation by
media and labeling and criminalization of people who did not commit
harm to others.

RMS never defended illegal acts. And that is the fact. 

> These are the kind of statements I referred to as disgusting in my
> previous message.  And yes, these quotes came from his personal web
> site and not the FSF or GNU project, but it's an organizational
> problem when RMS's public comments in any forum result in news
> coverage like this

That is just one of social issues as of these years, many social
issues related to sex were in past, including homosexualism, today we
have criminalization of incest in many countries, we have transgender
and gender issues. 

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Sandra Loosemore]

On 11/1/19 3:32 AM, Andreas Enge wrote:


Do you have ideas on how to change that, maybe on a per-package basis?
For instance, did you experience things in GCC/Binutils or in other
environments that you think might help to attract more women, or more
generally to make diverse groups of potential contributors feel more
welcome?


I've thought about this and discussed it with other CodeSourcery people 
from time to time in the past, but we've pretty much come up blank.  It 
might help if I personally pursued a more visible role in the community 
so I could act as more of a role model for other women, but e.g. I 
haven't been attending Cauldrons because I have some health issues that 
make travel and sitting in meetings all day difficult for me, and TBH I 
would rather just hack instead of trying to be an evangelist for the 
project anyway.


Maybe people who work for other organizations who contribute regularly 
to the GNU project could look at their hiring practices and try to 
recruit and retain more female hackers?   Companies that have the 
resources to hire and train interns or new grads might try harder to 
steer some female programmers towards the GNU project, for instance. 
CodeSourcery/Mentor has always seemed to be a female-friendly 
environment, but all of us women who've worked specifically on the GNU 
toolchain have been older (me, Catherine Moore who is now in a 
management role, Janis Johnston who has retired, and Rhonda Wittels who 
has left the company), and we don't have any more junior female 
developers in the pipeline at present.  :-(


-Sandra

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Sandra Loosemore]

I'd like to clarify some things, and provide some references.  Since I 
sent my original post in this thread, several people have accused me of 
slandering or defaming RMS, lying about what he has said, making false 
accusations against him, repeating false media reports, and the like. 
Well, I am not a liar.


I'm aware that some news reporting and social media posts have 
inaccurately characterized RMS's remarks about Virginia Guiffre as a 
defense of Epstein.  I'm aware that is not what he actually said in that 
particular instance, and I have not repeated those false 
characterizations, or based any of my thinking on that inaccurate reporting.


Here are some actual things that RMS has said about sexual exploitation 
of minors, with references to the sources of the quotes.


"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children."

https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29

"There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that 
willing participation in pedophilia hurts children."


https://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html#04_January_2013_%28Pedophilia%29

"Cody Wilson has been charged with hiring a "child" sex worker. Her age 
has not been announced, but I think she must surely be a teenager, not a 
child. Calling teenagers "children" in this context is a way of smearing 
people with normal sexual proclivities as "perverts". [...]   She may 
have had — I expect, did have — entirely willing sex with him, and they 
would still call it "assault". "


https://web.archive.org/web/20181005115646/https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-jul-oct.html#23_September_2018_(Cody_Wilson)

"Possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia  
should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only 
because of prejudice and narrowmindedness."


https://stallman.org/archives/2003-may-aug.html

There are many more of them, but you get the picture.  These are the 
kind of statements I referred to as "disgusting" in my previous message. 
 And yes, these quotes came from his personal web site and not the FSF 
or GNU project, but it's an organizational problem when RMS's public 
comments in any forum result in news coverage like this


https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scientist-richard-stallman-described-epstein-victims-as-entirely-willing

and this

https://www.thedailybeast.com/famed-mit-computer-scientist-richard-stallman-defends-epstein-victims-were-entirely-willing

and this

https://www.zdnet.com/article/richard-m-stallman-resigns-from-free-software-foundation/

and this

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/09/richard-stallman-leaves-mit-after-controversial-remarks-on-rape/

that all highlight his organizational ties and role in the free software 
movement.  MIT got the brunt of it because of their other problematic 
involvement in the Epstein scandal, but note that the reporter of the 
first article linked above is specifically asking for help in 
investigating "abuse in the open source community" (with the underlying 
assumption that this actually exists and is a serious problem) so we've 
all been tarred with the same brush.  Beyond the news articles, there've 
been a *ton* of blog and social media posts trashing both Stallman and 
the free software community for looking the other way for far too long. 
Some of those comments have been wildly inaccurate and off-base, but 
there is a public perception that the problem is all of us, not just 
RMS.  :-(


I'm confident that RMS's statements on child pornography, pedophilia, 
etc do not reflect a consensus view of the GNU developer community.  So 
why can't we stand up and say that "this is not us"?  It makes no sense 
for us to die on this particular hill trying to defend those views or to 
defend having him as the public face of our organization.  And trying to 
excuse him by claiming he didn't really say those things is not going to 
work, either, because the evidence is there.


I can talk about my own personal experiences working at the FSF in the 
early days of the GNU project in a separate post if people are 
interested (it's mostly tangential to the current discussion about 
leadership), but for now let me just say that I enjoyed my time there 
and have always been grateful to RMS for finding me something useful and 
fun to do when I was between "real" jobs.  I don't have a grudge against 
him, and I'm not trying to smear him with fictional stories of things he 
didn't really say or do.  It's the things he really *did* say that are 
problematic.


-Sandra

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Andreas Enge]

Hello Sandra,

thanks a lot for your personal account and well-argumented description
of how you see the situation.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 05:22:03PM -0600, 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.
> 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, it was about how we're
> an organization with an ingrained culture of harassing and demeaning women,
> (...)
> It's been a public relations disaster for the GNU project.  :-(
> 
> IMO, to regain control of our public image, I think we have to take some
> explicit and public steps to disassociate the GNU project from RMS's
> comments.

This was indeed my main motivation to sign the open letter at
   http://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
so if people ask me about it I will direct them to your message :-)

> It has bothered me for a long time that there are so few women participating
> in the GNU community.   I think I might be the only female maintainer on
> either GCC/Binutils right now (I haven't gone through the lists, but the
> others I used to know about have stepped down).  The photos of the attendees
> at recent Cauldrons show a group that is roughly 99% male.  The steering
> committee is 100% male.  There is something wrong with our community that we
> cannot attract more women, and we need to fix it, because a developer
> community that consists almost exclusively of old white men is not
> sustainable.

Do you have ideas on how to change that, maybe on a per-package basis?
For instance, did you experience things in GCC/Binutils or in other
environments that you think might help to attract more women, or more
generally to make diverse groups of potential contributors feel more
welcome? 

Andreas

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   IMO, to regain control of our public image, I think we have to take some 
   explicit and public steps to disassociate the GNU project from RMS's 
   comments.  

RMS's comments are unrelated to the GNU project and everyone in the
GNU project is be allowed to their personal opinions, that you are
promulgating a lie of what RMS never said doesn't help.

   My perspective is that the GNU project's mission is to produce 
   high-quality software that is free for everyone to use, and we should 
   welcome contributions from anyone who wants to support that mission.  We 
   certainly should not make affirming support for RMS's 
   non-free-software-related beliefs necessary for people to contribute to 
   the GNU project, or to take a GNU maintainer/leadership role.  Nor 
   should there be any kind of personal loyalty oath to RMS involved in 
   being a GNU contributor or maintainer.

What is being suggested sadly, is the opposite -- that people have to
take a loyalty pledge to contribute or become maintainers.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Gabe Stanton via General GNU project and free software discussions]

It seems their divisive techniques are continuing, and evolving. I
believe the use of (and acceptance of) the use of "old white men" to
describe people is an extension of what is seen on television and other
junk outlets. It seems they want to make all places and conversations
the same, selectively divisive. 
Some people are okay to lump together and denigrate, others are
'protected' for some reason. How is that anything but divisive. They
want some people to join, and others to leave. That's not inclusive or
helpful to the cause. It's an attempt to divide the community. Why make
it more comfortable for anyone just to kick out anyone who is 'old',
'white', or 'male', or heaven forbid, all three. 

What do we do then? Speak up and possibly help in dividing the
community? Stay silent until something really makes us upset? Form
another group, (that's dividing, that seems like not the best idea). 

I think gnu should focus on software freedoms and let individual
grievances be handled individually instead of initiating or
contributing to a smear campaign. Please if you feel the same (and have
read this far), make your voice heard somewhere, even if it's not here.
 Let the free software movement stay on task and not be divided or
distracted. 





On Thu, 2019-10-31 at 11:51 +0100, Jean Louis wrote:
> * Mark Wielaard  [2019-10-31 10:52]:
> > On Wed, 2019-10-30 at 22:04 -0500, wayne, steve wrote:
> > > I'll probably mute this thread after hitting send so you would be
> > > wasting invective for my sake but if it makes you feel better,
> > > knock
> > > yourself out.
> > 
> > No, we are not going to knock ourselves out. Be respectful to your
> > fellow GNU volunteers. Sexist attacks on someone pointing out
> > sexism or
> > calling them hysterical is totally uncalled for. If your
> > experiences
> > are different, then feel free to point that out. But belittling
> > someones experiences by attacking their credentials and character
> > is
> > not acceptable. Neither is calling people part of a mob and
> > criticizing
> > them for wrongs that you only speculate they may have done.
> > 
> > Also see:
> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-10/msg0013
> > 9.html
> 
> It is hypocritical.
> 
> This message:
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-10/msg00162.
> html
> 
> was not censored. You are censoring responses to that message. That
> is
> hypocritical.
> 
> Did you see in that message calling people "old white men"? Based
> upon
> your own standards of what is kind and what not, it is kind to call
> "old white men" but it is not kind to respond to such allegations?
> 
> Defaming RMS for "disgusting public comments defending sexual
> exploitation of minors" which is absolutely not true, and which was
> debunked in my message that you censored is fine, but my message is
> not fine:
> https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Censorship-of-the-answer-to-Sand
> ra-Loosemore-defamation-of-the-founder-of-GNU-project-on-gnu-misc-
> discuss-mailing-list-30th-October-2019.html
> 
> One big LOL to that!

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 7:29 AM Ruben Safir  wrote:
>  Just because YOU say he is defending sexual abuse of minors doesn't make
>  it so, no matter HOW many times you say it.  That is the fact and
>  hiding that fact behind charges of sexism is immoral.

Please follow the rules of this list. Repetition should not happen.
You have made your case.

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 10:45:19AM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-10-30 at 22:04 -0500, wayne, steve wrote:
> > I'll probably mute this thread after hitting "send" so you would be
> > wasting invective for my sake but if it makes you feel better, knock
> > yourself out.
> 
> No, we are not going to knock ourselves out. Be respectful to your
> fellow GNU volunteers. Sexist attacks on someone pointing out sexism or
> calling them hysterical is totally uncalled for. 

 Just because YOU say he is defending sexual abuse of minors doesn't make 
 it so, no matter HOW many times you say it.  That is the fact and
 hiding that fact behind charges of sexism is immoral.


> If your experiences
> are different, then feel free to point that out. But belittling
> someones experiences by attacking their credentials and character is
> not acceptable. Neither is calling people part of a mob and criticizing
> them for wrongs that you only speculate they may have done.
> 
> Also see:
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-10/msg00139.html

-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com 

DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive 
http://www.coinhangout.com - coins!
http://www.brooklyn-living.com 

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps, 
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Mark Wielaard]

On Wed, 2019-10-30 at 22:04 -0500, wayne, steve wrote:
> I'll probably mute this thread after hitting "send" so you would be
> wasting invective for my sake but if it makes you feel better, knock
> yourself out.

No, we are not going to knock ourselves out. Be respectful to your
fellow GNU volunteers. Sexist attacks on someone pointing out sexism or
calling them hysterical is totally uncalled for. If your experiences
are different, then feel free to point that out. But belittling
someones experiences by attacking their credentials and character is
not acceptable. Neither is calling people part of a mob and criticizing
them for wrongs that you only speculate they may have done.

Also see:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2019-10/msg00139.html

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[wayne, steve]

Long time listener, first time caller.

Ruben, for what it's worth your frothy-at-the-mouth email filled with
tropes of male nerd chauvinism probably isn't a great argument against
"this community is filled with reasons for women not to get involved". That
kind of angry rhetoric is more likely to burn bridges than build them. Just
sayin.

I don't know this RMS fellow, but everything I have seen put out by him
publicly demonstrates that he lacks a certain kind of social awareness and
inner filter that keep most public figures from self owning (really?
defending child pornography publicly??) or saying things that can easily
damage an organization's reputation. I can recognize this because I suffer
from a similar lack of social awareness and in lieu of filters I tend to
avoid talking at all, often for days at a time.

That being said, I'm not a supporter of GNU. I'm only attached to this mail
list because I'm generally lazy about unsubscribing myself from mailing
lists. I'll probably mute this thread after hitting "send" so you would be
wasting invective for my sake but if it makes you feel better, knock
yourself out.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 9:24 PM Ruben Safir  wrote:

> On 10/30/19 7:22 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> >
> > And then there were RMS's disgusting public comments defending sexual
> > exploitation of minors,
>
>
> There was nothing disgusting about it and he absolutely 100% wasn't
> defending sexual exploitation of minors.  It is not even near to what he
> said.
>
> > OTOH, it's clear to me that some women have indeed felt threatened by
> RMS's behavior,
>
> It is not clear at all.  It is clear to me that you've made a completely
> irrational leap in logic which is not supportive by the facts.
>
> It is clear to me that such a hysterical and irresponsible statement by
> you is a lynch mob modality that has NO PLACE in a just society, let
> alone at the FSF or GNU.
>
> ***You owe RSM and all of us an apology right now***
>
>
> Your email was offensive and disgusting.  Your right about one thing,
> this has became a civil rights issue.  You have falsely accused RMS in
> public of misdeeds that he never did, and saying things he not once ever
> said or intended.
>
> To me, you have put a black eye and your own name and make me seriously
> question your moral character, and not because you have an opinion, but
> because you made an outright false allegation and misrepresented the facts.
>
> And for the record, whether more women enter the IT and Math fields or
> not, it will not happen on the backs of the righteous largely male
> community that has carried the ball up until now.  These white men are
> not guilty of anything, especially a saint of human being like Richard
> Stallman who has fought for women's rights and paved the way for
> opportunities of all groups without prejudice and supporting blind justice.
>
> Richard has lived in my house for months and I know him intimately,
> sharing my Kosher kitchen, living room,  phone, food and company and
> many installfests.  We have had lots of women, not a few, at meetings
> with him.  He has been received warmly by everyone, until the discussion
> of Free Software has come up and you end up on the wrong side of an IP
> issue with him.  He has even spent considerable time with my children.
> We are nearly family.  What you are saying is outright slander.
>
>
> I recognize no moral grounds that you stand on, and your work with
> binutils does nothing to prop up your misdeed in this matter.
>
> Ruben Safir
>
>
>
>
> --
> So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
> that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
> proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
> http://www.mrbrklyn.com
> DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
>
> http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
> http://www.brooklyn-living.com
>
> Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
> but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013
>
>

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Sandra Loosemore, 31/10/19 01:22:
For those of you who don't already know me, let me introduce myself: I'm 
Sandra Loosemore, I am female, and I've been involved with the GNU 
project since 1991, when RMS hired me to write the GLIBC manual as a FSF 
employee.  Nowadays I am a maintainer for GCC and Binutils and an 
occasional contributor to GDB.


Nice to hear from you! Can you please ask to be added to 
? I think several names from the 
early 1990s are missing but FSF told me they prefer to add only people 
who ask themselves.


I'll just comment on a couple things:

If the CEO of a corporation made such controversial and 
offensive statements, the board would likely demand his immediate 
resignation as part of damage control. 
[...]  So I think it is probably ultimately the FSF's 
responsibility to protect their brand and decide who they want to put in 
charge of overseeing it.


It's fine to think of analogies, but corporations are hardly a model to 
follow blindly. Their only aim is to maximise short-term profits and 
stock value; people and ideas are disposable cogs. If you like Chomsky 
(Brooklyn is all over the place in this conversation!), you'd say that 
corporation are totalitarian structures.


Same with the brand, or any other asset: it's supposed to be a tool for 
a purpose, not a purpose in itself. I've often seen in Wikimedia that, 
whenever the board and staff proclaim they're acting on their "fiduciary 
duty", ultimately it means they're just letting themselves be cogs in 
the quest for maximum dollar values in the bottom line and balance 
sheet. Disaster invariably ensued.


Federico

Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Ruben Safir]

On 10/30/19 7:22 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> 
> And then there were RMS's disgusting public comments defending sexual
> exploitation of minors,


There was nothing disgusting about it and he absolutely 100% wasn't
defending sexual exploitation of minors.  It is not even near to what he
said.

> OTOH, it's clear to me that some women have indeed felt threatened by
RMS's behavior,

It is not clear at all.  It is clear to me that you've made a completely
irrational leap in logic which is not supportive by the facts.

It is clear to me that such a hysterical and irresponsible statement by
you is a lynch mob modality that has NO PLACE in a just society, let
alone at the FSF or GNU.

***You owe RSM and all of us an apology right now***


Your email was offensive and disgusting.  Your right about one thing,
this has became a civil rights issue.  You have falsely accused RMS in
public of misdeeds that he never did, and saying things he not once ever
said or intended.

To me, you have put a black eye and your own name and make me seriously
question your moral character, and not because you have an opinion, but
because you made an outright false allegation and misrepresented the facts.

And for the record, whether more women enter the IT and Math fields or
not, it will not happen on the backs of the righteous largely male
community that has carried the ball up until now.  These white men are
not guilty of anything, especially a saint of human being like Richard
Stallman who has fought for women's rights and paved the way for
opportunities of all groups without prejudice and supporting blind justice.

Richard has lived in my house for months and I know him intimately,
sharing my Kosher kitchen, living room,  phone, food and company and
many installfests.  We have had lots of women, not a few, at meetings
with him.  He has been received warmly by everyone, until the discussion
of Free Software has come up and you end up on the wrong side of an IP
issue with him.  He has even spent considerable time with my children.
We are nearly family.  What you are saying is outright slander.


I recognize no moral grounds that you stand on, and your work with
binutils does nothing to prop up your misdeed in this matter.

Ruben Safir




-- 
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://www.mrbrklyn.com
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002

http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www.brooklyn-living.com

Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013

Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Sandra Loosemore]

On 10/30/19 8:00 AM, Marcel wrote:

What I also see is a list of thirty men pretending that the leader of
the movement they volunteer for excludes women, yet I cannot find the
name of a single woman (forgive me if I missed it) in your list. I know
there are women participating in GNU, so the question is, were none of
them willing to participate in your power grab?


For those of you who don't already know me, let me introduce myself: 
I'm Sandra Loosemore, I am female, and I've been involved with the GNU 
project since 1991, when RMS hired me to write the GLIBC manual as a FSF 
employee.  Nowadays I am a maintainer for GCC and Binutils and an 
occasional contributor to GDB.


I haven't seen anything resembling a "power grab", so by definition I'm 
not on the list as participating in one.  I did previously send some 
comments to the private gnu-and-fsf@ address that was previously 
announced as the place to send them, though.  To paraphrase and expand 
what I said there (speaking only for myself, and not attempting to be a 
representative for all "women participating in GNU"):


It has bothered me for a long time that there are so few women 
participating in the GNU community.   I think I might be the only female 
maintainer on either GCC/Binutils right now (I haven't gone through the 
lists, but the others I used to know about have stepped down).  The 
photos of the attendees at recent Cauldrons show a group that is roughly 
99% male.  The steering committee is 100% male.  There is something 
wrong with our community that we cannot attract more women, and we need 
to fix it, because a developer community that consists almost 
exclusively of old white men is not sustainable.


I have never personally experienced or even witnessed any form of sexual 
harassment from anyone in the GNU community, including RMS.  I've also 
always felt that my technical contributions have been taken seriously by 
my colleagues.  OTOH, it's clear to me that some women have indeed felt 
threatened by RMS's behavior, been put off from participating by 
offensive sexual comments and "jokes" from others in the free software 
community, or felt that they were being belittled or ignored because of 
their gender.  It's also clear to me that a lot of men are aware of this 
stuff going on and find it offensive and inappropriate too.


And then there were RMS's disgusting public comments defending sexual 
exploitation of minors, which were plastered all over the news and 
social media last month.  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.  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, it was about how we're an organization with an 
ingrained culture of harassing and demeaning women, and that we have 
such a cult of personality surrounding RMS that our policy is not to 
challenge the remarks and behavior of our Fearless Leader no matter how 
offensive they are -- not just to women, in this case, but to anyone who 
cares about human rights.  It's been a public relations disaster for the 
GNU project.  :-(


IMO, to regain control of our public image, I think we have to take some 
explicit and public steps to disassociate the GNU project from RMS's 
comments.  If the CEO of a corporation made such controversial and 
offensive statements, the board would likely demand his immediate 
resignation as part of damage control.  I think the FSF and GNU 
maintainers collectively have a similar responsibility as custodians of 
the GNU project, and I do think RMS needs to resign for the good of the 
project.  I appreciate his past technical contributions and his 
promotion of the concept of "free software" to begin with, but he is not 
a good public ambassador for the GNU community and has not seemed to do 
much actual leadership of the project (either technical or management) 
for many years now.


My perspective is that the GNU project's mission is to produce 
high-quality software that is free for everyone to use, and we should 
welcome contributions from anyone who wants to support that mission.  We 
certainly should not make affirming support for RMS's 
non-free-software-related beliefs necessary for people to contribute to 
the GNU project, or to take a GNU maintainer/leadership role.  Nor 
should there be any kind of personal loyalty oath to RMS involved in 
being a GNU contributor or maintainer.


BTW, I'm not sure if this has come up before, but the "GNU" brand is not 
the personal property of RMS.  The trademark is owned by the Free 
Software Foundation (it shows up in the search at uspto.gov as 
registration #4125065).  So I think it is probably ultimately the FSF's 
responsibility to protect their brand and