On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 7:23 PM Nicholas Krause <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 4/2/21 6:34 PM, Russell Reiter wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 5:46 PM Nicholas Krause <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 4/2/21 5:27 PM, Russell Reiter via talk wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021, 4:38 PM Dhaval Giani, < > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto: > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> are all aware of. Many women were uncomfortable around > RMS and avoided > > > >> him. Many refused to participate in our community because > of > > > >> interactions with him. Do you think RMS is more important > than a > > > >> community of developers he is pushing away? > > > > > > > > > > > > See all the stuff you say we are all aware in this message > is just rumors and innuendo to me. > > > > > > > > > > Wait, so all these women saying those words are rumours and > innuendo? > > > > > > > > Greetings, > > > You know what, thats exactly what innuendo is, saying "all these > women" without even a link to a personal quote from them, not a one. > > That's a very dangerous to do. Lots of cases of mistreatment > against minorities or other groups historically > > aren't reported because of power conflicts. I mean would you really > we comfortable with staying the same > > thing if it was happening to children? I'm not stating the facts > would hope up in a court but just stating > > to forget about them because there is no trail runs into this > problem of power conflicts. Not to mention > > if they are stated then it runs into another problem of being traced > back to them which is a dangerous > > in another light. Forgetting about this isn't a good idea. > > > > > > You know there is a very famous loaded question journalists use to > generate headlines, to which there is no > > correct yes or no answer. "Have you stopped beating your dog/wife/child > yet?. If you answer yes you are > > damned as a dog/wife/child beater. If you answer no you are damned as a > dog/wife/child beater. > > > That's not what I stated. The problem for you is that your assuming that > power doesn't speak in the case with > RM but does for IBM. You have to show why RM should get a break but not > IBM. You can't just play favors. > The difference in power between an individual and a corporation I had thought should be obvious. In case it is not I do have a personal definition I use. A corporation has all the rights of a person but has no human rights to speak of. That's why I think Stallman should be allowed the benefit of the doubt, as a person. His personal history seems to be one of family dysfunction and then finding comfort and direction in studies in computer science at university. > > Mixing factual metaphors when someone's professional reputation is on > the line, makes your question about children > > just over the top for me. I'm not sure which is most dangerous to > democracy, innuendo whether legal or other, or > > actual slander and libel. So to answer your question, I never said > forget about anything, I said do the research and > > make your arguments. I said this to someone who dismissed me entirely by > editing my post in order to invalidate me, > > I guess as some sort of reactionary, instead of acknowledging that there > may be more to this situation than meets > > the eye. > > > > It's a sad fact of the internet and the newspeak of tabloid journalism, > also known as yellow journalism apparently for > > the colour of the cheap paper those inflammatory statements were > published on, that sensational stories sell copy or > > in the modern sense get you likes on twitter etc. It's a new kind of > journalistic capitalism but journalistic capitalism > > all the same. > > > > That's why I posted the link to someone who is digging deeper. > > > > > > > > You choose to disbelieve them? After a pattern of behaviour > that > > > multiple people have confirmed and talked about? > > > > > > > > > I can't disbelieve that which I can find no record of. What > multiple people are you talking about? > > > > > > What I can do is check some facts, to the best of my abilities. > This link I came across in my opinion has a more balanced view than yours. > > > > > > https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ < > https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/> < > https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ < > https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/>> > > > > > > > > > > What are not rumors and innuendo are the historical facts > on IBM, their influence, their power and powerful friends and most > importantly their big ball of money which they spend on influenceing the > influencers. > > > > > > > >> > > > >> I want to explicitly state this. RMS is a major reason > free software > > > >> is where it is. RMS's contributions to free software are > gigantic. > > > >> However, RMS cannot be a leader of our community if he > continues to > > > >> isolate a significant population of prospective > developers. RMS the > > > >> contributor - YES. RMS the leader - NO. > > > >> > > > >> RMS cannot be the poster child of our community if it is > going to be > > > >> relevant in the future. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is where being the willing poster child of a > charitable institution, used to raise funds, diverges from the science of > truth and innovation. > > > > > > > > In the legal science of truth, a person is innocent until > proven guilty in a court of law. However, media and the media barons in > conteol, crucify persons and their personas daily, just to make a buck. > > Sure but again your assuming being guilty in a court of law is > better than being found guilty by the public. > > There is lots of evidence that the court system isn't as infallible > as you think it is for both cultural > > and other reasons. > > > > > > I never said I thought the court system was infallible. What I always > try to say is that Canada is governed under the rule of law and nobody > should be judged guilty without evidence and based on gossip, innuendo and > worse, misstated and omitted facts. > While again your assuming facts are the be all end on on this. Favors have > to be interpreted and your > stating that the legal system is better because that's how Canada is > governed. That's my point you > can't just appeal to authority like that you have to show why that's > better. Your argument about IBM > could be used against legal systems so being consistent shouldn't you be > attacking the legal system > as well? > You keep using the word favors and indicate they should be interpreted. I don't follow this line of reasoning. As for attacking the legal system as well. I'm not attacking anything, I'm defending the right to free thinking and free speech, at least I thought I was. > > > > > > > > > > > > And no one has charged RMS with a crime. All we are saying > is, he is > > > not representative of a majority of us, and we don't want him > to > > > represent us. Some of us are minorities who have heard racist > > > statements being made by prominent folks in the community and > have > > > made us feel our contributions are not valued. It is not hard > to > > > believe after that experience that other prominent folks can > be > > > sexist. RMS has not stepped up and owned up to his actions and > > > apologized. I have no problem with people growing. We all make > > > mistakes. But doubling down like this, well I don't want to > be a part > > > of that community. And the reality is, there are tons of > "other" > > > people who will not join in and we will never know. So yes, > if the > > > choice is between thousands of those people, having a diverse > > > community, growing and being relevant to the world, I would > rather RMS > > > step down than us lose this community. And I would rather you > leave > > > the community if you think being more welcoming to other > voices is not > > > important. We don't need your contributions at the risk of > alienating > > > many more people. > > > > > > > > > Wow that last paragraph was a completely off the wall projection > of negative personal attributes towards RMS without a shred of evidence. I > wasnt aware that Stallman was a deemed racist by association. > > > > > > Its bad enough that someone on this list deemed him to be an > incel. Just type incel into google and you can see the links to terrorisim. > > > > > > > > > Again, I restate this. RMS as a contributor - yes. RMS as a > leader - > > > no. He doesn't represent me, and he certainly doesn't > represent the > > > community of foss developers. This is a discussion about RMS, > not the > > > conspiracy theories you are throwing about. > > > > > > > > > I first came across evidence of survelance capitalisim at a tlug > meeting in 2003 or so. So its not a theory to me, it is a fact of the > corporation and its predatory nature in order to make profits for the > investors. > > > > > > > > > What conspiracy theories are you talking about. > > > > > > Survelance capitalisim is a real thing, funded by real > corporations. Stallman is aware of this and pissed lots of people off by > talking about it in public. > > > > > > Or are you saying IBM didn't develop software and market it to > both sides of the conflict in WW2. Thats not a conspiracy its business as > usual for a global corporation like them. > > > > > > Just to be clear, IBM weren't the only ones who made money from > the holocost. You should read the quote about remembering the past on this > site. > > > > > > https://www.holocaustcentre.com/HEW < > https://www.holocaustcentre.com/HEW> <https://www.holocaustcentre.com/HEW > <https://www.holocaustcentre.com/HEW>> > > > > > > Coca Cola sold its german equipment to a company now known as > Fanta. > > > > > > Ford motors provided truck engines and parts to germany. > > > > > > Through a blind company Standard Oil provided their propritarey > additive for gasoline to the Luftwaffe for their planes so they performed > better at altitude. > > > > > > So let me phrase this issue a little differently once again. > > > > > > What part of the money which IBM used to purchase Red Hat, that > came from investments made by IBM, after they obscenely profited by trading > with the Nazis, is the amount you would be willing to use to fund your > work, voluntarily or paid at Red Hat today. > > > > > So that's a logical fallacy Russell you can't just attack someone's > opinion by overextending it like that. > > > > > > You think that's a logical fallacy and an over extension, how so? Is it > because a multinational corporation can spin itself off into other > corporations and sever the past associations or change operations to a > country of convenience, or all the other tools of making big money? > > > > Or don't you believe IBM made money from both sides of the second world > war? That's pretty much a historical fact for survivors of the holocaust. > > > > So I'm still trying to figure out what conspiracy theory I was accused > of propagating. I don't think what I said about IBM's acquisition of Red > Hat is > > a logical fallacy at all. I think it's all just business as usual for > dominating US based corporate profiteers. > > > > But that's just my opinion. > See: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy > Your comparing IBM's holocaust to RM's case meaning one is easier to > defend. > > > That's my final thoughts on this, > Nick > Thanks for sharing. > > > > > Nick > > > > > > Dhaval > > > > > > Russell > > > > > > “Th’ newspaper does ivrything f’r us. It runs th’ polis foorce > an’ th’ banks, commands th’ milishy, controls th’ ligislachure, baptizes > th’ young, marries th’ foolish, comforts th’ afflicted, afflicts th’ > comfortable, buries th’ dead an’ roasts thim aftherward.” F. P. Dunne > > > > > > --- > > > Post to this mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected] > > > > > Unsubscribe from this mailing list > https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk < > https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Russell > -- Russell
--- Post to this mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
