1. Keaman

    Who are they kidding. The free software movement is controlled by corporations.


    • A. Dvorak

      “The free software movement is controlled by corporations.”
      1) Citation needed.
      2) Which corporations? Are we talking about EvilGigaCorp or about corporations and organisations that have been set up to promote, defend, coordinate, … the free software movement (and related ones)?
      3) Is that by itself a bad thing, or are you trying to invoke the faulty image of Microsoft, Amazon, Alibaba, … controlling the free software movement to the detriment of others if only they can get some more money?
      4) What kind of “control” are you talking about? “Government Mind-Control Rays which you need to wear a tinfoil hat against” control? Subtle impulses to gently steer the movement? Or maybe subverting every group with a few plants that gather intelligence? Burly people knocking on your door and if that doesn’t help, on your head? Lawsuits? Threats against your loved ones? Bribery?


  2. Marcel Pol

    Virtue signalling from Red Hat. IBM and Red Hat earn a lot of money in providing monitoring software to China, they care more about money than humans. They would not dare say anything about human rights or the lack thereof in china.

    The Gnome Foundation has mostly people from Red Hat on their board.

    There are a lot of people in the Free Software community that support the Free Software Foundation. I do understand that RMS is not an easy man to work with. He also has some views outside of software that not everybody agrees with, but it would be better if we can focus on the things we share. He did nothing wrong in the so-called controversial conversation, he was mostly misquoted with quote-mining.

    The witchhunt is quite undesired and is hurting the free software world. That might even be the plan. De FSF and also RMS have a lot of enemies at big and wealthy companies. For Red Hat it would be easier if RMS and the FSF would disappear and they would become the “leaders” of the free software community.


    • Philip Chimento

      The Gnome Foundation has mostly people from Red Hat on their board.

      I’m afraid this is an incorrect statement. The GNOME Foundation’s bylaws prohibit employees of any single company from occupying more than 40% of the board seats, and with the current board size that means no more than 2 Red Hat employees.


  3. CW

    Thanks for the great coverage, Sarah.

    Disgusting that they voted him back in. No person, no matter how accomplished, is worth endorsing predatory behavior or worth pushing out all of the talented people who are discriminated against in the kind of environments where people can say those kinds of things with impunity.


  4. Don Barry

    Really? “A staggering lack of transparency”? How much transparency does RedHat, or IBM, or those behind this give to anyone other than their stockholders?

    This is an attempt to marginalize the FSF, bring “Open Source” and its “GPL is cancer” philosophy to prominence, preparatory to a redivision of the commons that the FSF and the unique circumstances of the 80s and 90s permitted to be build with corporate aid.

    The accusations advanced with sulfurous hysteria against Stallman do not pass the smell test. The hypocrisy of the journalists and corporate stooges behind this is simply boggling.

    The current line is “we demand democracy in the FSF” — by which what is really meant is, we demand the right to infiltrate your organization and reverse its principled perspective. That’s not the way democracy works. The FSF is not a government, it is an organization with a viewpoint, and it is entitled to protect that viewpoint. Indeed, that is what has made it so singularly valuable.


  5. akater

    If the board doesn’t act in the best interests of the greater community,

    It is not clear which community is greater. At the moment the support letter has more signatures, for exemple. Overwhelming majority of those who signed it are Russian-speaking — likely because the situation with political correctness in the first world has become sad enough that many people who actually support RMS, simply won’t come out. Meanwhile, no organisation speaks in his support — just ordinary people.

    A year ago his opinions had been grossly misrepresented in the mainstream media. Now, people who want him out for unrelated reasons, jumped on the bandwagon driven by those who, in 2019, made the crowd believe he defended Epstein. All while most of others are likely afraid to even talk. Quite pathetic.

    RMS is a principled, socially awkward man who very likely made the world a much better place. With him gone, the future of freedom will look far more gloomy and uncertain.


    • Sten

      There is absolutely nothing principled about defending pedophilia.

      And I don’t think that because of some “misrepresentation” of his words. I think that due to reading his actual words.


  6. Kajal

    Free Software community is abused by big corporations as they just copy paste the best software and put it as their versions.


    • Antonin Dvorak

      “abused by big corporations as they just copy paste the best software and put it as their versions”

      Can you show us some examples, or is that just a fact-free opinion?


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: