|FROM ||Ruben Safir
|SUBJECT ||Re: [Hangout - NYLXS]
|From hangout-bounces-at-nylxs.com Tue Nov 19 06:16:44 2019
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (www2.mrbrklyn.com [184.108.40.206])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86F6163F5A;
Tue, 19 Nov 2019 06:16:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [10.0.0.62] (www.mrbrklyn.com [220.127.116.11])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7C4161134
for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 01:00:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Ruben Safir
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 00:58:56 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Subject: Re: [Hangout - NYLXS]
List-Id: NYLXS Tech Talk and Politics
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
On 11/16/19 6:18 AM, Andreas wrote:
> On Sat, 2019-11-16 at 02:34 -0500, Dora Scilipoti wrote:
>> On 11/14/2019 04:32 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>> It has been discussed with him and he has been told that these kind
>>> discussions and decisions need to be made in public.
>> And you have been told very clearly that he does not agree.
> Does he not agree with decisions being made in public or discussions
> being public, or both?
There is no practical difference
>> You have also been told, publicly,=C2=A0=C2=A0what he intends to do.
>> Please do not insist.
> The current situation, as I understand it, is that there is a group of
> about 30 people, many of them active GNU maintainers, that are not
> happy with GNU.
You understanding is lacking. GNU and the FSF has faced threats of
folks picking up stakes because they are not happy with the politics of
GNU... and bigger fish than anyone currently involved with this
conversation BTW, starting with Linus Tovalds, Bruce Perens, Nat
Friedman, etc etc, have done just that, picked up and left. That hasn't
made GNU any less essential or productive. At its core, it is a
political entity designed to transform the conversation, languange,
public perception and to create a permanent store hosue of software
which is free of political limitations, especially limitations that
affect free speach and indiviudal rights.
GNU doesn't flinch nor make decisions based on the percieved desires of
a community. It is a theocracy, not a democracy, lead by RMS. That is
both its weakness and its strength. The 30 or so individuals you
maintain that are in rebellion, they are not essentail but they are
welcome, and nobody is above the governance, which is a kitchen cabinet
lead by RMS.
Everyone is a free individual and allowed to come and go as they please,
and that will have zero impact on the FSF or GNU. GNU and the FSF will
proceed according to the vision of its leader, with help of his trusted
> Any of them stepping back as a maintainer would be a loss for GNU, but
> fortunately so far none of them have felt the need to do so.
And if they do, they do. No one is a prisioner.
> There appears to be a set of demands that should ostensibly address the
> situations that cause the unhappiness of this group.
No, there doesn't. It is not GNU's mission to make maintainers happy.
> I'd much rather have these designs be drawn up with public input than
> hastily put together over private channels and only then presented
> wholesale with only the options of accepting or rejecting it in whole,
> which might make some maintainers feel they have to reconsider their
> involvement with the project depending on the outcome.
NO, there is no public face that makes these decisions easier. You have
hysteria, lynch mobs, and a decision making process that will not
guarantee the proper focus of the goals of GNU as it gets washed out by
hordes of bigots, fanatics, and maniacs who don't care about Free
Software principles, and don't make them the top priority of the
> So far, nothing irreversible has happened, and I think that's a good
> result, even if at times the discussion has taken a course that has not
> been comfortable for everyone involved.
That is just a threat, and you should know that RMS doesn't bend to
threats. That is the why GNU can consistently guarantee a foundation of
expectations when dealing with the FSF and GNU, because it proceeds
according to its principles and it doesn't bend to threats.
Additionally, this is all just a smoke screen for the real issue, which
is that few bullies have decided to Libel RMS as being a depraved abuser
of young women, which is 100% false, and can't be repeated often enough
that RMS has never supported the abuse or harm of women of any age or in
You can't trust GNU or the FSF if it caves in to fanatics who falsely
accuse RMS of having weird ideas about "consent issues" (which was
originally described as rape issues but the fanatics keep moving the
terminology and targets to flame hatred, and hoping something sticks),
all because he had the balls to stand up against a line of reasoning
with regard to jurisprudence and the hot button issues of human sexually
which is is leading to drum beat justice. These are sensitive areeas of
law and morality which has plagued humanity from its inception. It is
the desire of these people, and by extension those that support RMS's
removal from GNU, to end the conduct of any rational discussion of these
issues. Fuck that. Mob justice should not rule, not in GNU and not in
the world at large.
You have a chance to get on the right side of history here.... you need
to do it.
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
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
Being so tracked is for FARM ANIMALS and extermination camps,
but incompatible with living as a free human being. -RI Safir 2013
Hangout mailing list