MESSAGE
| DATE | 2020-02-27 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] feeling intimidated for endorsing the GNU
|
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 05:57:22PM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Le jeudi 27 février 2020, 16:27:57 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> > Frankly, this entire email is a lie.
>
> No you can’t say that.
Yes I can see:
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
Frankly, this entire email is a lie
>
> > It is very subtle,
>
> Yes it is. For that subtle fact: this mail doesn’t contain anything
> factually false.
Yes it does and I pointed them out specifically
> So it’s not a lie, and doesn’t even necessarily contains
> lies. The only things I could doubt on are motivations (or rather: their
> evolution), which are both: a) unprovable and b) not to be speculated on.
> However even here, whatever my doubt, I can’t possibly imagine there’s not
> at least a part of truth in it. Because it is hard to have friends, or at
> least colleagues, cosupporters of same views, etc. being hurt and not
> having an issue with that.
>
> > but it an
> > example as to why you receive such a strong push back. You are NOT
> > honest and your motivations [further speculation]
>
> Since it is subtle, you’d better analyse it further and comment it in a
> less easy-to-withdraw manner. And when it’s too difficult… well don’t. If
> something is “too subtle” it likely doesn’t have *yet* the easy
> consequences you’d like to criticize. So wait for them to appear, and
> keep privately, and kindly, your reservations. Stay on a “I can’t explain
> why, but reading XXX, I don’t trust him…”, never more. And preferably say
> that when it’s appropriated to say (when a friend of yours asks you, or
> when there’s a public consultation, and only *once* without repetition).
>
> If you had to get angry, do that in front of someone that would understand
> and stand it.
>
> > > I am very sorry for this. And I apologize because I was one of the
> > > people who suggested people discuss things on this list.
> >
> > The use of the term "things" here is a lie and newspeak.
>
> No, it is a general term. People can be lazy. They also can be lazy to
> purport theirs opponent’s views, but there’s no way using the word “thing”
> for anything is exagerated. It is only imprecise, but then precize
> yourself. People are allowed to be lazy, if they’re not sure what they’re
> talking about (make suggestions, instead of accusations).
>
> > What you suggested is that since you have two supporters moderating this
> > list,
>
> They don’t have anymore, they regret that actually. So you,re wrong.
>
> > [same accusations as always] are the "things" you decided to do.
>
> This was obvious. Nobody is stupid. You can use different terms as them
> for what, because of differing viewpoints, yet everybody understand them to
> refer the same thing.
>
> > > In hindsight suggesting this list was a terrible recommendation
> > > and I realize now that I put some people, who just wanted to discuss
> > > what they love about being GNU, through a lot of pain.
>
> > It was never your intention to discuss what you "love about being GNU".
>
> I think it could.
>
> > What there has been a discussion about has been the creation of a domain
> > that claims it represents GNU
>
> That was likely *after* they decided the list wasn’t as fit as it was
> initially.
>
> > At no time has there been any discussion of what we love about GNU,
>
> They were distracted, likely. By opposition. Not necessarily yours. But
> maybe without non-GNU people they would have more talked about GNU.
>
> > > I am very sorry
> > > for that.
> >
> > Save me the crocodile tears. Your efforts made RMS homeless for a
> > period of time.
>
> No they weren’t there at that time. It was the consequences of MIT
> people. These people aren’t MIT people. Don’t conflate accusations like
> the people you hate did with rms. I’m sure he wouldn’t like that as well.
> Also because he’s more reasonable.
>
> > > I am certainly not recommending people make themselves a
> > > target by publicly posting to this list anymore.
> >
> > Your hostile effort to take over GNU will be resisted by people of fine
> > moral character and real concern for the freedoms it strives to protect
> > no matter where you attempt to destroy GNU.
>
> Harassment, insults, etc. aren’t “resistance”. And behaving by repetition
> demonstrate the opposite of “concern”.
>
> > > I have heard from various people they felt intimidated both by
> > > reactions on the list, some by fellow GNU participants and from
> > > outsiders sending them some of the most offensive email they ever
> > > received.
> >
> > Since you have a pattern of lying, I chose not to believe that without
> > proof.
>
> Do you know Okham’s razor? Hanlon’s razor? First postulate incapacity,
> before to postulate malevolence. You’re not the only violent party. And
> you could as well consider people are more affected by what you write than
> you think. And yet, because they believe to be right, they could keep
> doing it yet being affected and even hurt by you. Because it is noway
> related.
>
> > Granted
> > though, I grew up in the deep ghetto of East New York, Brooklyn and not
> > some lillywhite ivy league town, so my sensibilities aren't yours. When
> > I was a teen-ager, people were shot dead on the street for an argument
> > over a nickle bag.
>
> Does it still nowadays? With time, and economical development, violence
> decreases (sometimes from good, sometimes from bad reasons, but the result
> is still good)… you don’t need to keep it staying there. We can resolve
> conflicts without this. Especially as it doesn’t help. RMS and GNU don’t
> need you for that. Especially, they don’t need you to follow their own
> ideas and what they believe in, which includes being kind even with
> opponents, which includes not banning dissension, .
>
> > > Some contain direct personal threats, extremely racist or
> > > sexist language and even antisemitic views (luckily most of the worst
> > > ones aren't posted to the list, but there have certainly also been
> > > implicitly/implied threats and racist or sexist views posted on this
> > > list).
> > > I am certainly not recommending people make themselves a
> > > target by publicly posting to this list anymore.
>
> > I think this is yet another lie.
> > Please post them to the list. Your accusing unknown posters of racists
> > and sexist views being posted. I think you are a liar.
>
> I was surprised, but I hope they’re not such blatant liars. I guess the
> racism (including antisemitic) attacks would likely be from MikeeUSA (aka
> nipponmail, aka gameonlinux), who’s known for this behavior, and, given
> his participation (I used to be cc to many attacks but understandably
> wouldn’t be anymore), that was likely more than one month ago. But then I
> keep finding it strange, as I don’t see how he built up any argument with
> this…
>
> Also, most of participants were (unfortunately) men, so I’m unsure who the
> sexists attacks were directed to… I think the most likely possibility,
> that you might not think about, were about sexist *discourse* which is not
> private personal threats, attacks, etc. that have happened in the last
> weeks (the ones from you). In fact, even publicly, I just recall,
> MikeeUSA has repetedly supported pretty masculinists views, sexist views,
> etc. They’re likely talking about him then, not you. As he was a very
> notoriously known troll, and sent way more offensive as you (in comparison,
> you almost seemed legit to me, at the time you were both writing).
>
> > > The FSF keeps ignoring our calls for a neutral discussion space. And I
> > > think it is unacceptable that people are afraid to publicly discuss
> > > why
> > > they participate in GNU because they feel intimidated and fear to get
> > > personal threats or have to endure racist or sexist language.
> >
> > People should not have an uncensored mailing list to through about
> > libelous charges at individuals without it being accountable.
>
> Yet they are accountable, and *you* argued against censorship. You
> shouldn’t complain against censorship when you broke rules (ones by rms)
> and moderators advises (indirectly given by rms), while arguing for
> censorship for people who, however dishonestly, simply expressed diverging
> opinions, and *implied* (never restating them, and not all of them) unkind
> accusations against people.
>
> > There is NO MAILING LIST BY GNU that is not safe for people to post of
> > all genders, creeds and races.
>
> Wellll… if we choose not to consider any spam-filtering software, the very
> concept of mailing-list and open protocol over a federated network (like
> mail) is actually unsafe. Any really violent troll (such as MikeeUSA)
> could just get the emails (thanks to federation and publicness) of people
> whose discourse they don’t like, and harass them (through that same open
> and decentralized protocol).
>
> To fix that requires to discuss privately (what they suggested, done
> (through their gnu.tools mailing-list) but initially didn’t want to), to
> centralize things (so you can’t message someone without passing through a
> moderator), or some mix of both (for instance you could simply publish
> moderated archives, without emails).
>
> Or to add some free-software and federated way of moderating. Mastodon
> has recently popularized the idea of giving sysadmins and hosters the
> ability to moderate anything. But there could be others, and thanks to
> the concept of federations, all of these could freely compete.
>
> > Your repeated accusation otherwise is a
> > fraud and a lie. The ONLY racist email sent was an obvious anti-Semitic
> > troll, which nobody would give a damn about. It is just interesting to
> > me, though, that as usually, only the Jews get targeted.
>
> If MikeeUSA at some point, privately, backed up his masculinist view about
> women dominating the world/etc. by antisemitism (actually he’s the troll),
> that wouldn’t be directed at a specific Jew, yet be racist, right?
>
> > > IMHO the
> > > FSF really has a responsibility to the GNU volunteers to be able to
> > > work and communicate with each other without having to feel harassed
> > > all the time.
> >
> > That is another lie. I've reviewed these mailing lists and been a
> > member of a number of them and NOBODY has been harassed other than a
> > few maintainers harassing Richard and falsely accusing him of racist
> > views and actions.
>
> When you restate your opinion again and again, especially when it has
> blatant insults added, it is harassment. And if you use mailing-list to
> get emails of people you harass (which is to be expected, as you, as you
> said, participated to them), you use them to harass people. Even if the
> moderators were always there and doing an incritiquable job, if you used
> the lists to get email and mail privately, you used mailing lists to
> harass people, so it becomes possible to say “GNU mailing-lists are used
> to harass people”… in great part because of you. As before this didn’t
> happen a lot (never, to my knowledge), and only you and MikeeUSA did that.
> So, even though it was possible before (as with any mailing-list) you made
> it aknowledgable.
>
> If you never participated to those mailing-list, and only harassed people
> privately, and never shown to have got these mail by mailing-lists
> (typically by not doing that as answers to their mails there), say by
> harvesting mails on the web, on projects’ web page, etc. based on stuff
> such as anti-rms statement, social contract support, etc. one no longer
> could say “GNU mailing-lists are used to harass people” (yet they could
> say “GNU project current governance is supported by agressors, sexists,
> racists and harassors” (which is the dishonest way of saying “2 harassors
> (whose one sexist and racist threatening troll) support the current
> governance of GNU” (which is actually still half-false as I’m unsure
> MikeeUSA supported rms at all, he was only trying to conflates rms’ views
> and interests with his own, blaming at the same time his not-agressive-
> enough behavior as his fault, possibly for racist and sexist reasons as
> well)
>
> > > We are working on providing a better discussion space for GNU
> > > volunteers,
> >
> > You can do whatever you want, but this is not what you have tried to do
> > until now
>
> So now you state they do?
>
> > and you are NOT ALLOWED to do is to claim that your represent
> > the GNU project.
>
> They could, however, as they’re currently trying to do, claim they set up
> tool for represent the set of people chosed by rms to maintain the GNU
> project. They only happen to resume “we bring together rms’ chosen
> maintainers ourselves” as “we represent the GNU project”. Which is simply
> a way to ignore everything else that constitutes GNU’s structure.
>
> > What you have tried to do is oust GNU leadership by
> > falsely accusing them of left-wing social justice thought crimes and
> > dragging their reputations through the mud.
>
> He’s notably himself a self proclaimed “social justice” left-wing guy you
> know…
>
> > > but that is taking some time. I hope we can soon though, so
> > > people who do want to publicly discuss why and how they want to
> > > participate in GNU can do that in a more safe space.
> >
> > I am sure it will be highly censored and full of libel and false
> > accusations. Good riddance.
> >
> > For the record, GNU and the FSF never discriminates in its hiring or
> > appointments according to race, religion, gender,or sexual identity.
> > Furthermore, Richard Stallman has been a vocal proponent of Feminism,
> > and women's rights for his entire life and a vigilant support of civil
> > rights for all walks of human life.
>
> Maybe, as they may try to be, except rms has less consensual views as
> them. Which is what typically happens when you attempt at the same time
> to have public views on everything, and to be consistent, like he does.
>
> Also, as a more famous character, his life details are more publicly known
> and criticizable as theirs, who are a lot less personalized and famous.
> You talk about crowns and stuff, but I’m doubting they’d wish to be in rms’
> shoes. They’d likely prefer governance to be less personalized, possibly
> more opaque, but not something that could get them in the same troubles.
--
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
_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|
