To be entirely clear since people can see this public (thank Librem for that annoying fact). I believe that you are acting in bad faith and spreading lies to defend RMS for no clear reason. I don't want to be associated with that.
> spreading lies
Now that is a serious accusation you are making, please explain what you mean.
In my opinion, spreading lies is a very bad thing to do, if I had done that I would take it back and apologize.
The people who signed the "open letter" (that you defended) appear to think otherwise. The letter does in fact spread falsehoods, as I explained to you earlier. I have not yet seen anyone apologizing for signing that.
See also this: https://edsantos.eu/on-stalman/
You have continued claiming the open letter is a mob attack. You have continued claiming about CoC breaking and then you claimed to be confused and wanting to hear the opinion of gnome developers. You have continued to spread every single article defending RMS. You continue to claim that people are being dishonest even though I've made it clear to you that I believe the claims.
You are not just curious, you are dishonest. You piss me off.
> wanting to hear the opinion of gnome developers
Yes, I still want to hear from them.
I wrote this, please read and help pass it on to others if you know other people who signed the open letter, this is for them, I would like to hear what they think about it:
What do you think about it? I really tried to make it constructive and not dismiss any concerns.
1) Please don't post your article repeatedly in off-topic conversation with people who signed the letter.
2) You misspelled "something" as "somthing" in your article, just thought I'd tell you.
3) You have not addressed my concerns neither in the article nor this message. I have read it and I have some thoughts about it but I don't wish to tell you them until you address my past concerns about how you've been discussion this issue.
> You misspelled "something" as "somthing"
Oh, thanks, I corrected that now.
> You have not addressed my concerns
I'm sorry, let me try to do that now.
> You have continued claiming
> the open letter is a mob attack.
There I think you put words in my mouth. But if what you mean is that I have pointed out that many people have together attacked a single person with a focus of trying to paint him as a terrible person, then, well, that's just what happened.
> You have continued claiming about CoC breaking
In my opinion, the open letter does not follow the advice of "Be friendly, Be empathetic, Be respectful", from the GNOME CoC. Do you have a different opinion about that?
> and then you claimed to be confused
> and wanting to hear the opinion of gnome developers
Yes, I have a hard time understanding how people working with GNOME projects can think signing such a letter is okay. I do want to hear then explain their thinking.
> You have continued to spread every
> single article defending RMS
That is not true. For example, I have chosen not to spread the "pro-RMS" Github letter because I found it too harsh, too angry. I prefer more constructive dialogue.
> You continue to claim that people are
> being dishonest even though I've made
> it clear to you that I believe the claims.
You say that as if "the claims" is something that you can believe as a whole. That does not make sense. I have pointed to something specific that is false, I did so also in the article where you found the spelling error. Go and look it up, you will find that there is something false being referred to.
In my opinion, if you make a personal attack (which you should probably not do in the first place), then it is not good if something you reference as basis for accusations turns out to be wrong. Like the headline of that article referred to.
I would like to understand your position regarding that; is it that you don't see anything wrong, or you see there is something wrong but you don't think it matters?
> you are dishonest
No, I am not.
> You piss me off.
That, I cannot argue with. It is probably true. But I would like to help you move from being pissed off, to instead understand what I mean.
I had hoped that the article (with the fixed spelling error) would help, I tried to be very careful with writing that.
Anyway, now I have at least tried to addressed your concerns. I'm going to bed, happy to discuss this more tomorrow.
> There I think you put words in my mouth.
It seems strongly implied from both of these interactions :
Here, you heavily imply that the person you're replying to is wrong and it is indeed a mob.
Here you fail to address the comment about it being a mob and entirely ignore the very transphobic remarks. I still feel quite ashamed that not only you ignored them but you said you'd tell them what I said.
> In my opinion, the open letter does not follow the advice of "Be friendly, Be empathetic, Be respectful", from the GNOME CoC. Do you have a different opinion about that?
Absolutely. While I think the letter could've brought more nuance, it's definitely not in violation of any of those blurbs in my opinion. It reads like a Code of Conduct violation report to me.
> I do want to hear then explain their thinking.
I don't believe that from my interaction with you. You seem to give more importance on disagreeing than understanding. That's why it turned into a tiring argument. That's without mentioning that you previously expressed that you don't think it is and you've went as far as saying that :
> My thought regarding the CoC in this case was that, by looking at things from that point of view, that could be a way of making the people who signed the letter reflect on what they have done.
This does not read as trying to understand them, it reads as trying to "gotcha" them.
> For example, I have chosen not to spread the "pro-RMS" Github letter because I found it too harsh, too angry.
Alright that and Lunduke's, DT's or Lukesmith's videos on the subject (probably some more but not very important to this point). I think the most worrying part is that I've not seen you post about *any* of the people who want him removed, it is very much one-sided.
> Go and look it up, you will find that there is something false being referred to.
I don't believe it is false. While the article doesn't provide the necessary information, RMS' talk about sexual assault are appallingly bad to the point it's not that far off even if I don't think the source is stretching that statement about Minsky too thin. The letter mentions this opinion also.
> In my opinion, if you make a personal attack
It is not a person attack. Nowhere in the letter do you see people talk about RMS' appearence or his being.
> Like the headline of that article referred to.
The letter explains it and I agree with that.
> is it that you don't see anything wrong, or you see there is something wrong but you don't think it matters?
Both, as I've said previously, I don't think needing to agree on everything is necessary to support the removal of the FSF Board.
Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.