Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project

[Wilson Bustos]

P,
> And even before this incident, I've seen people say they don't want to get into free software because of Stallman's behaviour and because people defend him from any criticism.

So, why didn't you do anything before? why now? If it was a real issue that would happen in before, not now.

> Don't put Stallman on a pedestal, he is not perfect, and just because he founded GNU doesn't mean he should lead it forever or that he should have final say in everything.

I think that is not the problem, no one is perfect, that is why no one needs to be perfect to represent a group as GNU, then, RMS doesn't need to be removed because he is not perfect, right?

Also, why use the official Guix website to show that statement, there is a vote of all the members to do that?

p.s: I'm sorry for text this also, but I don't believe in a SJW speech.

p.s2: A social network text message proof of nothing.

El jue., 10 oct. 2019 a las 17:33, P (<address@hidden>) escribió:

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, October 10, 2019 7:22 PM, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:

> > Your problem is that you published this statement to guix-devel. If you
> > don't mind, I'll forward your mail to gnu-system-discuss, which is the
> > appropriate mailing list.
>
> I don't mind.
>
> Guix developers published biased and factless defamation of RMS on Guix pages.

This is what they actually said: "GNU is not fulfilling its mission when the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to."

Which is true, and the funny thing is, it's true by your own admission as well. You said that people attacked RMS for his statement. What is that if not alienation?
I've seen people publicly state that they'll cancel their membership and donate to Conservancy instead of FSF.
And there is this thread by a free software developer who helped draft GPLv3 [1].

As far as I can tell, you have not disproven those statements, so I can only conclude that you either were not aware of them, which would mean that you did not actually look into the problem as deeply as you would want us to believe, or that you were aware of them, but dismissed them as insignificant, which would reflect badly on your value system.

And even before this incident, I've seen people say they don't want to get into free software because of Stallman's behaviour and because people defend him from any criticism.

Don't put Stallman on a pedestal, he is not perfect, and just because he founded GNU doesn't mean he should lead it forever or that he should have final say in everything.

ps.: sorry for writing this on the devel list, but there is so much vitriol against the core devs here already that I felt like I had to counterbalance it.

[1]: https://pleroma.site/notice/9nh9bWH6RbrQinMp1M