Reply to post: Re: Shouldn't have to ask; well run orgs already know

Re: Shouldn't have to ask; well run orgs already know

So wait.. The "decent thing" is to quit when a tiny majority of people say you should consider it?

I assume you meant tiny minority. The decent thing is to consider quitting when you're no longer an asset and before you destroy your own legacy. If only 1 or 2 people said it, well that could be a personality clash or rivalry or the complainant's issue. 24 people may be a small number in absolute terms, but it signifies there's at least a question to be asked. You can't explain away that many disgruntled maintainers, can you?

Correct, I did mean "minority". From the numbers I've seen quoted, GNU has at least 300 and probably more likely 500 maintainers. So lets go with 250 maintainers - those making the complaint are still less than 1%. If it's 500, they're less than ¹/₂% (<0.05% in case my notation is unclear).

I've worked on much smaller projects where a much larger % of people strongly take a different view. Even with volunteering, they've either taken their ball and gone home, continued working but griping all the time (often asked to leave in the end because their negativity harms the project), or been mature enough to realise they're a minority, it's not "their" project as they came on board later rather than being the founder, and have worked diligently and worked for the project even if they disliked the decision. I can only assume that these 24 people are "millenials" as they expect a very small minority to be able to get their way regardless of the experience and expertise that went in long before them.

I think you should consider quitting the internet. Now, "do the decent thing" and leave.

Thanks for the suggestion, but in the absence of any argument as to why we'd all be better off if I did, I think I'll stay.

Well I'll use one you seem to like. I dislike what you have to say. I dislike what you stand for. Therefore you should go.

That's the level of argument you're making. I'm not kidding, see below.

RMS need only address the argument that has been made to him as to why he should go, and we're all on the same plane.

So if he was to address it (which is often a very stupid thing to do in these cases sadly - defend yourself and people will only throw more negatively your way even if you can show yourself to be wholly innocent of the charges - "trying to prove you're innocent just shows you have something to hide", "no smoke without some fire" etc etc etc) - if he was to address this stuff you'd back off from demanding he leaves?

Look, don't take my word for it; have a look at Andy Wingo's take on the whole thing.

I did.

"The result, sadly, is that a significant proportion of those that have stuck with GNU don't see any problems with RMS. "

Boils down to "Even though lots of other people think we're wrong and he should stay, us very small few dislike him so he should go".

I read the post you linked. I read the material linked from the post you linked and much of the material linked from that. What I saw disgusted me, and just about brought tears to my eyes.

Stallman said it's a bad thing to be claiming "rape" just based on someone being 17 or 18 in a certain area (ie "statutory rape") - as a rape victim I absolutely have to agree with him, someone doing something with someone just under age is nowhere near the same as someone holding someone down and forcing them to do stuff they don't want to.

Stallman is being villified for commenting at some stage that he thought the age of consent could be at 16, obviously making him a 'child molester' in these people's eyes. For me, I could quite legally go out and bang some 16yo boy tonight because I live in one of the majority of countries where it is 16 or lower (I believe, never studied it). A lot of people would be creeped out since he'd be some 30 years my junior, but much of the world believes that if some 16yo twink is into ancient bears then that should be what he's allowed to do. Believing that does not make someone a child molester. (well, maybe it kinda does given the age gap, but it's still legal - and yes, arguing that something is "legal" does not make it morally or particularly socially acceptable!).

The arguments and comments by these people, especailly as many are just based on hearsay and rumour or things they personally find offensive ("people seen lounging around shirtless in Stallman's living area - OH THE HORROR!" (without any real context given - was it someone who lived there? Someone escaping severe summer heat? A sex-orgy of overweight ancient bears? (this mindbleach is MINE! GET YOUR OWN!)

I'm afraid the post you linked to has done more to harm your argument than anything else you've said thus far. If this guy is the calibre of those 24 who are wanting Mr Stallman to leave, then really they should just fork off and do something else, leave the rest of us alone.

As I said earlier, my opinion of Mr Stallman, based on comments by other people, was quite low until recently when I had a little bit of personal dealings with him. Reading what you provided has helped actually improve my opinion of him, and the strength of character he must have to have been continuing the fight despite all the crap thrown his way, much of it like the childish "creepy teacher" rumours that 12 and 13yos seem to indulge in.