I don’t think he has ever been transphobic, but I can believe the guy who made Emacs is an ableist, and no need to argue about the misogynist part

REGARDLESS, even if he was innocent of all accusations, the fact the FSF needed Stallman back is a sign they’re not actually capable of taking their own direction. Would the FSF just dissolve if he died?

Like, yeah, I can easily argue RMS doesn’t actually hate anyone or think women and children are his toys or anything like that. I can argue that just has very, very out of touch opinions.

This doesn’t matter.

First, because he’s still not a good representative of the community when defending these ideas. If you’re gonna have community leadership, it should be as inclusive as possible, and Stallman does the opposite there.

But more importantly, wouldn’t you want to grow up past him? We should have already moved on back when he called Miguel de Icaza a traitor (oh yeah, that was something), but the FSF didn’t feel like his time was out. They’re gonna stick with him as much as they can. For what? Is his ego’s presence really worth throwing out decades of the movement he created for?

@xerz I think that Stallman's biggest problem is that he's actually very naive. He doesn't really see the corporatification of open source, he still believes we're in the 80s, where it's "hackers" vs "corporations". Because of this, the FSF lost the marketing campaign a long time ago, and are now seen as "those weirdos that make everything happen slowly and care about irrelevant stuff".

Stallman lacks the people skills: like being soft-spoken, caring about his looks or the ability to "sell" (for the lack of a better word) himself. He still believes that being a good developer is all that matters, when it has mattered very little in the past decade.

The FSF needs someone who can turn the tide, and them being very dependent on the Stallman brand will hurt them more and more in an exponential fashion. Stallman is unappealing, and that appeal matter a great deal because they're fighting a political fight, not a technical one. They need someone with guile, charm and charisma, someone who can appeal to developers. And that person is 100% not Stallman, who people still ridicule for the foot fungus incident (rightfully so tbh).

@shellkr @famicom @xerz Thanks, but no thanks. While I respect the work that was done there 35 years ago, I don’t believe the FSF has been relevant for the problems we face today for a while now. Not to mention that I have no desire whatsoever to lead any sort of hierarchy. Heck, I wake up every day and try to write code that I hope will make hierarchies optional instead of a fact of life :)

@aral @shellkr @famicom @xerz The GNU AGPLv3 is a lot younger than 10 years and also highlights the difference between "free" and "open source" software. For instance, Signal and Telegram clients are "open source" but not free because you can't just fork a whole platform that's centralized around a single proprietary server (Signal's published server code is outdated). The FSF and GNU were responsible for writing the AGPLv3 license and several essays to address this concern.

@Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom With input from a few others, I have written a document called "Towards A Communal Software Movement" to start a discussion about where we go from here. I invite your comments!


@Seirdy @xerz @aral @shellkr @famicom The code is on Codeberg. Feel free to open pull requests to contribute however you can. codeberg.org/CommunalSoftware/

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.