Richard Stallman Resigns From The Free Software Foundation

[fuzz]

Um.... nobody. You do realize that Stallman is completely inconsequential to the world at large, right?

You really underestimate the role he played in free software and getting the GPL used. Hopefully the FSF doesn't change because of this, but I wont be surprised if the GPLv4 or whatever they decide to call it removes many of the requirements currently outlined.

[fuzz]

We need a friendly, eloquent voice without significant personality disorders to be the public face of Linux. I've evolved on this one a bit and decided that Stephen Fry would be an excellent choice. In fact, he essentially made a demo reel of sorts for doing so several years ago....

Stephen Fry - Free Software

He doesn't eat anything off his feet or give the camera the middle finger and then cry about whether he might be made to wear a tie. He behaves like a well-adjusted adult. We could use some of that in Linux!

There is no "we" to represent. This entire project exists as a bunch of non-conformity hackers trying to get shit done, and that's how it should stay.

Linux is used because it works well and because contributions to the source are required to remain open source. Not because of some sort of bullshit corporate-friendliness.

If you want to "appeal" to people, you should drop the GPL, sell the kernel to some corporate entity, and run everything through a "brand safety" firm.

Jeeze that sounds fucking terrible.

[alcalde]

He could retire anytime and be happy of that he did more than 99% of people have done for the universal good of humankind.

I must have missed the times Stallman cured polio, ended apartheid and brought down the Iron Curtain.

[alcalde]

There is no situation a pre-18 year old in the US can consent to sex, they cannot legally contract. the law does allow for a relaxing to such rules as I recall if both parties are within 2 years of age, and that's it.

An otherwise great post, but this portion is incorrect. In many (over half?) the states in the US, the age of consent is 16, not 18.

[alcalde]

And again I ask myself (with the same tinfoil hat senses tingling as starshipeleven) WHO BENEFITS ? (from having RMS out of the way) https://itsfoss.com/richard-stallman-controversy/

Um.... nobody. You do realize that Stallman is completely inconsequential to the world at large, right?

[alcalde]

Virginia Giuffre is 35 in 2019. The incident happened in 2002. She would have become 18 that year. Legal ages of consent are 17 in New York where Epstein lived and 16 in Massachusetts. Even if Minsky did have sex with the girl, which Stallman said he didn't, it would have been 100% legal. Before someone chimes in with Romeo and Juliet laws, that's below legal age of consent. They literally shamed the guy into resigning OVER NOTHING.

Do you really believe a 17yo wanted to have sex with a 73yo married man? Or that Minsky believed she did?

[alcalde]

He took the libertarian contract and overlayed it on to people too stupid to negotiate a meal or clothes, much less a contract. Which then led to a 'Epstein did nothing wrong' conclusion. Meanwhile heads are rolling at MIT and Harvard just for taking a grant from the guy.

He F'ed up. That's not how Libertarianism works. Freedom + "Responsibility" does not apply to kids of any mammalian species.

The Register interview article nailed it on the head - for a man so meticulous about words (it must be called GNU/Linux, don't refer to his work as open source, etc.) he'd have done much better to have paid attention to the use of his own language instead.

[alcalde]

As Richard Stallman Resigns Let’s Consider Why GNU/Linux Without Stallman and Torvalds Would be a Victory to Microsoft

We're no longer at war with Microsoft, so there's no victory to be had. Microsoft is our friend, like Russia was the USA's friend post-Communism, pre-Putin. I've been saying for years that Stallman and Torvalds have made great technical contributions but have been horrible public faces for Linux and open source. Now when things have hit the fan people are finally starting to reign these two in. Up until now they've been like spoiled children who never get told "no".

We need a friendly, eloquent voice without significant personality disorders to be the public face of Linux. I've evolved on this one a bit and decided that Stephen Fry would be an excellent choice. In fact, he essentially made a demo reel of sorts for doing so several years ago....

Stephen Fry - Free Software

He doesn't eat anything off his feet or give the camera the middle finger and then cry about whether he might be made to wear a tie. He behaves like a well-adjusted adult. We could use some of that in Linux!

Now, as for mascots, it might be time to ditch the penguin. Penguins don't really have anything to do with Linux. My new idea is to use Benjamin Franklin as our mascot. Why?

[Franklin] refused to patent any of his inventions, saying:

"As we enjoy great Advantages from the Inventions of others we should be glad of an Opportunity to serve others by any Invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously."

If there had been computers, Franklin would have been an open source advocate!

If we did these things we might drastically improve the image of Linux and dispel the stereotype that it's only for maladjusted neckbeards... by hiding our maladjusted and our neckbeards.

[alcalde]

Damn, I am truly shocked by this, I have trouble differentiating the FSF from RMS, it was his life goal... was it he going to do now? Go back to programming?

I'm imagining him working at an ice cream parlor, getting beard hairs in the ice cream, and refusing to scoop unless the customer calls it "GNU/chocolate".

[FSForce]

Against sfconservancy, we call for Stallman to step UP from his positions in the free software movement.

Richard Stallman have defended firmly and blamelessly free software for decades with rigorous and strict adherence to free software, without drifts or nuances opensourcist, FOSSist or similar in which many people and groups of the free software environment fall, and this (and nothing else) is what should be valued to judge whether a person does well its role of leading an idea or movement. We may or may not agree with his personal statements on issues other than free software, but we have always seen he make it clear when he talk about free software as a reference person on the subject, and when he talk as a ordinary person called Richard about issues that are not free software, avoiding mixing the personal and the professional.

Additionally, accept his resignation means giving the reason to those who believe in “perfect people” and idolize people to turn to hate them if they do something wrong, a dualistic perspective of people (the good ones and the bad ones) who feed nefarious discourses of groups pitted against each other, source of conflicts and wars. Considered the current regrettable tendency to judge a person’s role in one topic, by his personal statements in other topics, this sets a bad precedent. Since the perfect people don’t exist, then nobody can be a reference person on any subject. We strongly publicly criticize the regrettable role he has played Software Freedom Conservancy on it.

We are clear that much of the controversy has been promoted by those who creave to be people/organizations of reference in the free software world seeking to introduce opensourcist ambiguity in the environment, something they can only achieve if they discredit and remove from the scene those who have firmly defended free software for decades as it is and thanks to which we have achieved so much in this time.

We also criticize the role played by the Free Software Foundation, its management team has unpity assumed the resignation of a person who has made an unjust decision as a result of unjust persecution (they have not even published a minimal public statement showing their regret or discomfort about it). Moreover, the Free Software Foundation has not broken but maintains the relationship with Software Freedom Conservancy that has promoted the persecution of Richard Stallman, even the current Executive Director maintains his public support for Software Freedom Conservancy. Such an Free Software Foundation doesn’t deserve our support. With this, the Free Software Foundation has not lost only who was its president, they have lost all the people who support Richard Stallman. If the Free Software Foundation says goodbye to its president in this way, we say goodbye to the Free Software Foundation. We will continue our work of promotion and diffusion of free software, but we’re not gonna do it under the acronym of who has looked the other way when this was happening to a person who has done so much for the cause as Richard Stallman.

We call (in order to organize us) to all people who defend free software as it is, without ambiguities or slippery slides, as Richard Stallman has defended for decades, people who are mature enough to understand and defend that there are no ideal or perfect people, that with every person you share some things and disagree in others, and that people who act as representatives of one topic should only be judged by their adjustment or not to the cause that they are representing while they perform the role of representatives.

Thank you very much!


https://fsforce.noblogs.org