Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
f> If Free Software is not anti-capitalist, it is not capitalist f> either. This thousand-word rambling checks all the boxes for semanticist niggling: . Verbose . Sententious . Vacillatory . Unactionable Avoid moralizing from 10,000 feet. Go after something specific that you don't like, e.g., lobbying GNU Emacs to stop supporting proprietary operating systems.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
* Jean Louis [Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:47:30 +0300]: > And free software is accepted and demanded in society today. This may be because it offers benefits to corporations. Although the position of Free software is not partisan or anti-capitalist itself, I believe the situation is comparable to the success of the East India Company-- their goal was to secure trade, not to overthrow India, but their success was in part to their goals furthering the ambitions of British rule. I see open source as the exploitation of this corporate usefulness. I'm not in favour of redefining Free Software. The FSD is an important cornerstone, I've even compared the GNU Manifesto and the FSD to the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. But I see the corporate participation as becoming increasingly intrusive and interfering with the goals of Free Software to give all users control of their computing, trying to exploit Free Software (if the license is copyleft they still insert themselves into the organisations that maintain it, if they license is permissive they still do this) to regain control of users. You see this in mounting levels of anti-features that users hate-- this is a different issue than "it doesn't do everything I want" or "insufficient features." In theory, they can just remove the features. That's what Freedom 3 is all about and the license grants this freedom very explicitly. It's technically there in writing. In practice, the larger (particularly larger, and more elaborate) and more mainstream software gets, the less forkable it becomes. Theoretically, Freedom 3 is Freedom 3 and code has no mass. In practice, communities gravitate towards larger projects which then even pull corporations towards them. If the project resists corporate interference (it won't, larger projects also attract financial support if intially small interference is bowed to, and this becomes a habit in time) then users can remain the priority. All users are equal, but in practice corporate users are more equal than others and slowly regain control of the software people use. Freedom 3 (in practice) gets warped along this mutual gravitational force. Free Software is not anti-capitalist, and the FSD is CERTAINLY not. The GNU Manifesto was unsympathetic to corporations that wanted to control users, and the Free Software Movement (the bulk of it) is unsympathetic in theory, but in practice seems alarmingly neutral. If Free Software is not anti-capitalist, it is not capitalist either. The FSD is neutral. Free Software (the movement) too could afford to be, without the interference. The usual protest to this of course is "it's not interference"; the problem has to be denied and re-framed to continue interfering and this routinely takes place-- sometimes even on these mailing lists. Since Free Software is neither capitalist nor anti-capitalist (the FSD is neutral-- I have no problem with that) and since the corporations have interfered so substantially, I (routinely) call for the support of the anti-capitalist subset of Free Software. Projects that rely on funding won't care for it, but corporations are not the only source of funding-- just the easiest (1. Press Buttons. 2. Kiss Ring. 3. Receive bacon.) "If your business is selling an operating system, you will not like GNU, but that's tough on you. If your business is something else, GNU can save you from being pushed into the expensive business of selling operating systems." -- http://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html It's not that I won't touch software that had corporate funding, I think many projects have received funding over the years without bowing to anyone. Many sponsors then chose to move on. This is possible. That's what an anti-capitalist subset of Free Software is capable of. As a subset, it redefines nothing-- no non-free (non-commercial) licenses, no new FSD, no unofficial redefinition of Free Software either-- the cornerstones are kept. The corporate interference is left behind-- and with it, some of those much-wanted, sometimes-needed funds. Microsoft and other companies also need to make money, of course. As long as it's at the expense of users controlling their computing (regardless of license, in practice) I have no sympathy. Yes, hopefully they can keep the lights on and continue developing. But throwing more money at projects that put user control of computing second isn't likely to improve anything either. Users who can't afford to buy out freedom must come first, or freedom will simply be bought out. Audacity is one of the finest recent examples. I expect none of the present GNU developers to agree, by the way. I consider GNU already lost-- not for technical reasons, but for the years-running decay in its politics. It's not just GNU. Since 2011, rms has refused to judge distributions on anything but the FSDG. If the FSDG is sufficient in bolstering freedom this is no problem. If people other than rms pick up the slack this policy leaves, this
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
dick writes: > Pretty simple actually. A wise man, quite recently, clarified that "the > goal is ending the existence of proprietary software," and that "there > si still a long way to go." So this would seem a necessary and > internally consistent first step, not to mention labor-saving! I’m confused. You just repeated your point without properly explaining any of the underlying motivations and how it would help. How would this be an "internally consistent" first step, let alone "labor-saving", let alone "necessary"?
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
> I think you should further elaborate how you came to the > conclusion of [discontinuing support for macOS and Windows]. Pretty simple actually. A wise man, quite recently, clarified that "the goal is ending the existence of proprietary software," and that "there si still a long way to go." So this would seem a necessary and internally consistent first step, not to mention labor-saving!
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
dick writes: > i> Last time I checked, the vast majority of personal computing devices > i> are still running a fully proprietary operating system > > I investigated this claim, and *mein gott*, you're right. There appear > to be at least two such systems macOS and Windows. The first thing we > ought to do is discontinue GNU Emacs support for those systems. What do > you think? I think you should further elaborate how you came to the conclusion of making this suggestion and what consequences it would involve. > i> The expression "No one" in the English language means exactly what it > i> says on the tin. > > I personally *do* care about the distinction between "open source" and > "libre". Perhaps we can agree the hyperbolic use of "No one" in this > context was short for "No one of consequence." No, I disagree. Clearly some people "of consequence" do care about this distinction, otherwise we wouldn’t be having this conversation on this particular mailing list in the first place. Perhaps you can move the goalposts once again until you find something that is actually sound.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
i> Last time I checked, the vast majority of personal computing devices i> are still running a fully proprietary operating system I investigated this claim, and *mein gott*, you're right. There appear to be at least two such systems macOS and Windows. The first thing we ought to do is discontinue GNU Emacs support for those systems. What do you think? i> The expression "No one" in the English language means exactly what it i> says on the tin. I personally *do* care about the distinction between "open source" and "libre". Perhaps we can agree the hyperbolic use of "No one" in this context was short for "No one of consequence."
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
* inasprecali [2022-02-21 13:18]: > dick writes: > > > Now that the war's been won > > Has it? Last time I checked, the vast majority of personal > computing devices are still running a fully proprietary operating > system, together with mostly proprietary applications. That is my impression, though it is also right that we have such increase of usage of free software, after 2 decades of observation on my side. > > [1] No one cares about the theoretical distinction between open > > source and libre. > > The expression "No one" in the English language means exactly what > it says on the tin. Such a quantifier means exactly *zero* people > (or more formally, an empty set of people). To disprove this > universal claim, it is enough for one (1) counterexample to exist, > and I am such one counterexample (and I’m probably far from being > the only one). You’re obviously entitled to your personal > opinion, but please don’t make the childish mistake of > generalizing it to a universal truth. That people do care there are evidences all over Internet in their software licenses and how they express themselves, though I consider all of us friends who go more or less practically into same direction of having free software and thus freedom. Some will complain more and be louder, some will not complain at all and play their free or non-free games on proprietary or free systems, though we are all one quite distinguished group of free software users. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
It is best not to feed the troll, it already has been banned from some GNU lists as it is since it cannot behave.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
* faifl...@danwin1210.de [2022-02-20 15:09]: > As much as I would like an organisation headed by rms, the closest you're > going to get is to be more like him-- not through parroting everything he > says, but by learning what you can and applying it with your own logic and > thinking. That is well said, and there are many thinkers promoting free software ideas, expanding it and continuing the work based on the free software philosophy. And free software is accepted and demanded in society today. This may be because it offers benefits to corporations. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
dick writes: > Now that the war's been won Has it? Last time I checked, the vast majority of personal computing devices are still running a fully proprietary operating system, together with mostly proprietary applications. > and open source [1] is now the default configuration You grossly misunderstand what this "war" you speak of was about all along. The goal is not merely becoming the "default configuration", whatever you mean by that, they goal is ending the existence of proprietary software. There is still a long way to go. This is the reason why the following claim of yours: > the FSF has become less a serious advocacy group, and more a > historical society. Is not only baseless and void of insight, but reeks of a decades-old misunderstanding which I’m amazed still exists today. > [1] No one cares about the theoretical distinction between open > source and libre. The expression "No one" in the English language means exactly what it says on the tin. Such a quantifier means exactly *zero* people (or more formally, an empty set of people). To disprove this universal claim, it is enough for one (1) counterexample to exist, and I am such one counterexample (and I’m probably far from being the only one). You’re obviously entitled to your personal opinion, but please don’t make the childish mistake of generalizing it to a universal truth.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
> Free software without rms is like the theory of relativity without > Einstein. Your rambling is void of coherence and insight. There was a time when the FSF, and its choice of chief executive, was relevant. That time roughly overlapped with Microsoft's heyday in the 1990s. Now that the war's been won, and open source [1] is now the default configuration, the FSF has become less a serious advocacy group, and more a historical society. Consider my characterization less dimunitive and more congratulatory of the FSF. [1] No one cares about the theoretical distinction between open source and libre.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
On 22/02/01 05:41PM, GNU Hacker wrote: > Ruben Safir writes: > > > Richard Stallman was bullied from his position at MIT and FSF and the > > FSF should take the couragous move of reinstating Richard as President > > of the FSF > > RMS for president! I also believe so. RMS was bullied because of his approach to things outside computing and liberty thereof. Though some of his thoughts I disagree with RMS does a great job leading the free software movement. Those that say RMS is too extreme shall consider how the FSF and the movement would be without him and other "extreme" people. Should people here be neutral or soft-line and accept the use of proprietary software when not absolutely necessary (i.e. by law, which is problematic here in China and many other places), the free software movement wouldn't have continued to this day. Defend software freedom (https://fsf.org) End software patents (https://endsoftwarepatents.org) Read EULAs (https://www.eff.org/wp/dangerous-terms-users-guide-eulas) New sites, suggestions welcome: Free Computing Movement (https://fcm.andrewyu.org) Host Things Yourself (https://host.andrewyu.org) Libre Society (https://project.andrewyu.org/libresociety) To any Skynet, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. agents reading my email: please consider whether defending the Constitution and our basic rights to freedom and speech and privacy against all enemies, foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. (Adapted from RMS) Andrew Yu (https://www.andrewyu.org) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
As much as I would like an organisation headed by rms, the closest you're going to get is to be more like him-- not through parroting everything he says, but by learning what you can and applying it with your own logic and thinking. Parroting has already been done and the cost is that it falls short when new problems for free software arise-- if he doesn't address those then they tend to go unaddressed. The alternative is better, because while it's more error-prone it's also more like building a Distributed Stallman cluster. Overall it should be far superior to an automated tape recorder. This is my advice to everyone who wants him to be president again. The organisation doesn't even fit him anymore. The FSF was founded on the GNU Manifesto; today everything is so corporate, monopolies are relied on so heavily, it makes rms seem almost like a legend or myth. Though he is of course, quite real. Important arguments have been relabeled petty arguments, and petty arguments have been relabeled important. I don't blame him for sticking to the old talking points, but a lot needs to be said that just won't be-- as if it never happened, or doesn't matter. I'm grateful for the Support website and its contributors. If in the course of being like rms you find you are suffering the same persecution, then a Distributed Stallman would be ideal for solving that problem as well. I don't think this other business, of oaths, solves as many problems as it has created. Policy is as flimsy substitute for wisdom. Granted, even I thought things could be SLIGHTLY less top-down and rms-centric. But not to the point where it fell apart, or put him in a corner. Free software without rms is like the theory of relativity without Einstein. It still works-- if you understand it-- unless you throw it away, or try to subtract Einstein from it.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
Ruben Safir writes: > Richard Stallman was bullied from his position at MIT and FSF and the > FSF should take the couragous move of reinstating Richard as President > of the FSF RMS for president! -- GNU Hacker. Emacs Lover. Free/Libre Software supporter. FSF Member. stallmansupport.org - Disinformation succeeds because so many people care deeply about injustice but do not take the time to check the facts.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
rms cannot be simply reinstated into FSF because he left himself willingly. For him to go back inside FSF would require initiative from him, added to efforts of both parts.
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
在 2020年02月23日 08:08, Ruben Safir 写道: On 2/22/20 7:51 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote: rms cannot be simply reinstated into FSF because he left himself willingly. For him to go back inside FSF would require initiative from him, added to efforts of both parts. ___ Hangout mailing list hang...@nylxs.com http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout This is indeed true, although he left because he was being bullied. Ruben I can't see my emails wrote the mailing list, why? Is there a censorship? I wrote the below email to the mailing list: 转发的消息 主题: Re: [r...@gnu.org: What's GNU -- and what's not] 日期: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 09:56:47 +0800 发件人:徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe 组织: XUJIZHE 收件人:Alfred M. Szmidt , gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org Yes, GNU has a very clear vision and philosophy, and with a world wide community, driven by volunteers, since last century, over 40 years. If we force or suggest the volunteers to add a "Social Contract", it's something like ask the users to click the "Agree" button on the EULA. It's not a good idea. We should be open to everyone to be the volunteers to support the vision and the project. And I saw there is a trend in community, some people trying to force the narrow political right ideas to the others. Please think the GNU Project's history, it's not a closed organization, not a country, so don't use a "State a of GNUnion" idea to think the project. GNU is a free, open and world wide community, there is no boarder, it's comprehensive, that's why I could be part of the movement since 2005. 在 2020年02月06日 14:36, Alfred M. Szmidt 写道: -- 徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe 生生不息，繁荣昌盛！Live long and Prosper! xuji...@xujizhe.com +86 186 1279 0101 http://www.xujizhe.com
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
在 2020年02月22日 23:55, Alexandre François Garreau 写道: Le samedi 22 février 2020, 16:54:05 CET 徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe a écrit : 在 2020年02月22日 20:51, Alexandre François Garreau 写道: rms cannot be simply reinstated into FSF because he left himself willingly. I don't think so. Officially, it was so. He never denied so. That would then require fix anyway so. Please refer to the below link: https://blog.dachary.org/2020/02/10/how-the-cancel-culture-was-leveraged-against-rms/ And we all know without this, RMS won't resign from FSF and MIT, so we could NOT think this is his own willing, he has no choices and have to do this. -- 徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe 生生不息，繁荣昌盛！Live long and Prosper! xuji...@xujizhe.com +86 186 1279 0101 http://www.xujizhe.com
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
在 2020年02月22日 20:51, Alexandre François Garreau 写道: rms cannot be simply reinstated into FSF because he left himself willingly. I don't think so. For him to go back inside FSF would require initiative from him, added to efforts of both parts. RMS is the best people to lead the free software movement, it's helpful to lead FSF also definitely. -- 徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe 生生不息，繁荣昌盛！Live long and Prosper! xuji...@xujizhe.com +86 186 1279 0101 http://www.xujizhe.com
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
FSF seems defunct. When was the last time we had a glorious Peoples Action, such as the Cisco lawsuit? Forever ago. It's not doing what it's supposed to do: which is protect the copyrights it holds (whole reason it induces their hand over to begin with) On 2020-02-22 12:51, Alexandre François Garreau wrote: rms cannot be simply reinstated into FSF because he left himself willingly. For him to go back inside FSF would require initiative from him, added to efforts of both parts. ___ Hangout mailing list hang...@nylxs.com http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
Le samedi 22 février 2020, 17:01:32 CET 徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe a écrit : > 在 2020年02月22日 23:55, Alexandre François Garreau 写道: > > Le samedi 22 février 2020, 16:54:05 CET 徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe a écrit : > >> 在 2020年02月22日 20:51, Alexandre François Garreau 写道: > >>> rms cannot be simply reinstated into FSF because he left himself > >>> willingly. > >> > >> I don't think so. > > > > Officially, it was so. He never denied so. That would then require > > fix anyway so. > > Please refer to the below link: > > https://blog.dachary.org/2020/02/10/how-the-cancel-culture-was-leveraged > -against-rms/ > > And we all know without this, RMS won't resign from FSF and MIT, so we > could NOT think this is his own willing, he has no choices and have to > do this. If law or status of FSF permitted him to be fired, maybe this is what would have happened. If he has left, it’s likely because he felt it was better to have this happen this way. That applies also for MIT: he wasn’t fired.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
Le samedi 22 février 2020, 16:54:05 CET 徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe a écrit : > 在 2020年02月22日 20:51, Alexandre François Garreau 写道: > > rms cannot be simply reinstated into FSF because he left himself > > willingly. > > I don't think so. Officially, it was so. He never denied so. That would then require fix anyway so.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
I support this idea! 在 2020年02月17日 03:42, Ruben Safir 写道: Richard Stallman was bullied from his position at MIT and FSF and the FSF should take the couragous move of reinstating Richard as President of the FSF Nobody but Stallman can do what he does, as a spokeman, and strategic planner to protect end users from the abuses of non-free software. The reevaluation of the FSF and GNU should be put on hold and RMS needs to put back in his rightful place. Please see http://www.nylxs.com/ for a yet incomplete, but more detailed explanation as to why this is correct course for the FSF and GNU. It is the best response to those who abuse the GNU trademarks, and resources for their own purposes. Ruben -- 徐继哲 - Xu Jizhe 生生不息，繁荣昌盛！Live long and Prosper! xuji...@xujizhe.com +86 186 1279 0101 http://www.xujizhe.com
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
Since the NYLXS mailing list doesn’t seem to respect unsubscribe requests, the only fix I’ve found to this appears to be blocking hang...@nylxs.com Feb 17, 2020, 05:13 by m...@runbox.com: > The list has flooded me with hundreds of repeated messages. I have received > two unsubscribe messages, but I am still not unsubscribed. Completely > unwelcome and massive spamming (several hundred emails over less than a week, > most or all of them repeats from gnu-misc-discuss. > > Complete agreement with J.B. Nicholson on this issue. > > > On February 17, 2020 7:57:43 PM GMT+07:00, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: > >Why don't you like being subscribed to his list? > >I'm subscribed too, automatically, but I'm GLAD for it. > >Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. > >What, this list isn't GOOD enough? > >On 2020-02-17 04:40, J.B. Nicholson wrote: > >>> Ruben Safir wrote: >>> Nobody but Stallman can do what he does, as a spokeman, and > >strategic > planner to protect end users from the abuses of non-free software. >>> >>> If that's true then everything RMS headed up is in deep trouble. At >>> some point everyone needs to be replaced if only because nobody lives >>> forever. I don't agree with the above quoted claim. I think it's >>> possible to find whom we need to keep the free software social >>> movement going and I think it's important that more people speak >>> publicly about software freedom as a value unto itself. >>> >>> I won't post to your other mailing list to which I was apparently >>> subscribed without asking, and I cannot unsubscribe (the links in the >>> email were unreachable). I shouldn't have to unsubscribe as I >>> shouldn't have been subscribed in that manner in the first place. >>> ___ >>> Hangout mailing list >>> hang...@nylxs.com >>> http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout >>>
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
* J.B. Nicholson [2020-02-17 08:39]: > Ruben Safir wrote: > > Nobody but Stallman can do what he does, as a spokeman, and strategic > > planner to protect end users from the abuses of non-free software. > > If that's true then everything RMS headed up is in deep trouble. That is generalization, without any fact. The fact about GNU is that GNU is successful and it may be seen in the world. RMS is successful in promoting free software philosophy, with very few helpers with him. Majority of contributors are technical. Yet free software philosophy is fundamental. > At some point everyone needs to be replaced if only because nobody > lives forever. Yes, but GNU is privately founded project, not public. > I don't agree with the above quoted claim. I think it's possible to > find whom we need to keep the free software social movement going You are welcome to guide free software social movement. GNU project and free software social movement while related, they are separate things. You are welcome to make seminars, speeches on free software. > and I think it's important that more people speak publicly about > software freedom as a value unto itself. Yes, that is right. You are free to promote free software any time you wish. Jean
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
The list has flooded me with hundreds of repeated messages. I have received two unsubscribe messages, but I am still not unsubscribed. Completely unwelcome and massive spamming (several hundred emails over less than a week, most or all of them repeats from gnu-misc-discuss. Complete agreement with J.B. Nicholson on this issue. On February 17, 2020 7:57:43 PM GMT+07:00, nipponm...@firemail.cc wrote: >Why don't you like being subscribed to his list? >I'm subscribed too, automatically, but I'm GLAD for it. >Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. >What, this list isn't GOOD enough? >On 2020-02-17 04:40, J.B. Nicholson wrote: >> Ruben Safir wrote: >>> Nobody but Stallman can do what he does, as a spokeman, and >strategic >>> planner to protect end users from the abuses of non-free software. >> >> If that's true then everything RMS headed up is in deep trouble. At >> some point everyone needs to be replaced if only because nobody lives >> forever. I don't agree with the above quoted claim. I think it's >> possible to find whom we need to keep the free software social >> movement going and I think it's important that more people speak >> publicly about software freedom as a value unto itself. >> >> I won't post to your other mailing list to which I was apparently >> subscribed without asking, and I cannot unsubscribe (the links in the >> email were unreachable). I shouldn't have to unsubscribe as I >> shouldn't have been subscribed in that manner in the first place. >> ___ >> Hangout mailing list >> hang...@nylxs.com >> http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
Why don't you like being subscribed to his list? I'm subscribed too, automatically, but I'm GLAD for it. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. What, this list isn't GOOD enough? On 2020-02-17 04:40, J.B. Nicholson wrote: Ruben Safir wrote: Nobody but Stallman can do what he does, as a spokeman, and strategic planner to protect end users from the abuses of non-free software. If that's true then everything RMS headed up is in deep trouble. At some point everyone needs to be replaced if only because nobody lives forever. I don't agree with the above quoted claim. I think it's possible to find whom we need to keep the free software social movement going and I think it's important that more people speak publicly about software freedom as a value unto itself. I won't post to your other mailing list to which I was apparently subscribed without asking, and I cannot unsubscribe (the links in the email were unreachable). I shouldn't have to unsubscribe as I shouldn't have been subscribed in that manner in the first place. ___ Hangout mailing list hang...@nylxs.com http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
Ruben Safir wrote: Nobody but Stallman can do what he does, as a spokeman, and strategic planner to protect end users from the abuses of non-free software. If that's true then everything RMS headed up is in deep trouble. At some point everyone needs to be replaced if only because nobody lives forever. I don't agree with the above quoted claim. I think it's possible to find whom we need to keep the free software social movement going and I think it's important that more people speak publicly about software freedom as a value unto itself. I won't post to your other mailing list to which I was apparently subscribed without asking, and I cannot unsubscribe (the links in the email were unreachable). I shouldn't have to unsubscribe as I shouldn't have been subscribed in that manner in the first place.
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
* Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss) <936-846-2...@kylheku.com> [2020-02-16 23:17]: > On 2020-02-16 11:42, Ruben Safir wrote: > > Richard Stallman was bullied from his position at MIT and FSF and the > > FSF should take the couragous move of reinstating Richard as President > > of the FSF > > The FSF minus Stallman is a rotten organization; simply adding Stallman > back is not enough. It could use a good old-fashioned > house-cleaning. I cannot agree on this, as the FSF was already in place and its founder is RMS, and FSF is doing its job to help in distribution of free software and fights for free software politics. When founder sets up a foundation, the foundation runs by itself, Founder need not be president, this is not necessarily and one can realistically see that since RMS left as President, that FSF continues doing its business, and that both GNU and FSF work hand in hand together. Thus the activities of the FSF are same activities as before the event. Good people are running the FSF, and I have no worries about that. There are so many various GNU systems around, some containing proprietary software, but they are in existence, so everybody is free to take a GNU OS and improve it in such a way that it is fully free software, by removing the proprietary parts. Some of FSF endorsed GNU distributions are already doing that. There is Purism, Hyperbola, Parabola, GuixSD and so on. Even if there is no financial support and team support by the FSF, there is still plethora of people who would be helping in creation of fully free software. What really does matter is not the FSF alone, but the foundational philosophy of free software. > Everyone behind that heinous, cowardly move should in fact be > ousted. That is not so, and if you have specific case, that anybody did something against the Articles of Organization or By-Laws, you should then speak to them, to FSF. However, it is not a public organization and they are not in obligation to even consider your requests or complaints. It is Foundation, Non-Profit Corporation, that has its founding documents and uses such and free software philosophy for its management and activities. > It actually boggles the mind how such leftist nonsense is tolerated > in country that elected Trump, on a platform consisting of material > such as "grab `em by the pussy", against the reproaches of which > throngs of people chanted "we don't care", and who might just give > him a second term. Other politics should not be subject in this mailing list. No other politics but free software politics is subject in GNU operating system projects, including in discussions. That is exactly the problem with the anti-social contract (Ludovic Courtès and few others) as well, they are from the extreme political direction that is opposed to behavior of people and have expressed it so on chat and in emails, when I asked them. It is their effort to "rule" and "govern" the group by some new rules. Yet GNU project was liberal since its inception and does not accept it. Just in the same manner that GNU does not promote nor endorse no other politics, because it is bringing people together, then introducing Trump as subject is also introducing "other politics". Myself I am apolitical, but my friend nearby me is respecting Trump, so it really does not matter, we are together. Introducing politics in GNU is dividing people, which is what was demonstrated by their public shamings of RMS and other actions. > The average American will absolutely not condemn Stallman for some remarks > made in defense of Minsky (perfectly understandable and well within his > right), or some comments he wrote on mailing lists on this topic or that > that were actually well-reasoned and rationally defensible. It does not matter what average American would do or not, what matters really is what is just. Jean
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
On 2/16/20 02:42 PM, Ruben Safir wrote: > Richard Stallman was bullied from his position at MIT and FSF and the > FSF should take the couragous move of reinstating Richard as President > of the FSF > +1 > Nobody but Stallman can do what he does, as a spokeman, and strategic > planner to protect end users from the abuses of non-free software. > > The reevaluation of the FSF and GNU should be put on hold and RMS needs > to put back in his rightful place. > > Please see http://www.nylxs.com/ for a yet incomplete, but more detailed > explanation as to why this is correct course for the FSF and GNU. It is > the best response to those who abuse the GNU trademarks, and resources > for their own purposes. > > Ruben
Re: Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
On 2020-02-16 11:42, Ruben Safir wrote: Richard Stallman was bullied from his position at MIT and FSF and the FSF should take the couragous move of reinstating Richard as President of the FSF The FSF minus Stallman is a rotten organization; simply adding Stallman back is not enough. It could use a good old-fashioned house-cleaning. Everyone behind that heinous, cowardly move should in fact be ousted. It actually boggles the mind how such leftist nonsense is tolerated in country that elected Trump, on a platform consisting of material such as "grab `em by the pussy", against the reproaches of which throngs of people chanted "we don't care", and who might just give him a second term. The average American will absolutely not condemn Stallman for some remarks made in defense of Minsky (perfectly understandable and well within his right), or some comments he wrote on mailing lists on this topic or that that were actually well-reasoned and rationally defensible. That's definitely a double standard. You can be as odious as you want, if you have money and power that buy you the attention and support of the populace, otherwise you can't even breathe the wrong word.
Richard Stallman should be reinstated to President of the FSF
Richard Stallman was bullied from his position at MIT and FSF and the FSF should take the couragous move of reinstating Richard as President of the FSF Nobody but Stallman can do what he does, as a spokeman, and strategic planner to protect end users from the abuses of non-free software. The reevaluation of the FSF and GNU should be put on hold and RMS needs to put back in his rightful place. Please see http://www.nylxs.com/ for a yet incomplete, but more detailed explanation as to why this is correct course for the FSF and GNU. It is the best response to those who abuse the GNU trademarks, and resources for their own purposes. 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
