Huh, RMS has resigned from the FSF. I didn't think that'd happen. I welcome that move. Let's try to move on, and rebuild a more inclusive & diverse movement for user freedom.

@ebel rms wasn't affecting "inclusivity" of the free software movement in the fucking slightest and im tired of everyone trying to cancel rms over what he decides to debate


I hate how we're at a point where it's a surprise to see a powerful (at least within the community) man actually facing consequences for things they've said, even pretty mild ones.

@Nezchan @ebel im not surprised at that, im surprised at how people are blowing this well out of proportion, especially when there are "worse" things rms has publicly said long before this email leaked

@opal @ebel

And as such he should have been removed from a position where he was the public face for the organization long before this. But as I suggested, it's unusual for connected and influential dudes like this to face even a mild consequence like being asked to step down from said position.

@Nezchan @ebel the "mild consequence" isnt even what im focused on, im thinking more about how idiots are calling rms a paedophile and thinking he has CP on his computer or some outlandish bullshit, and the news media is gladly fueling the fire for that
@Nezchan @ebel rms isnt even the only party this libel affects; people are probably wondering why MIT would have "kept an epstein supporter around for so long" (even though that isnt at all what happened, people jump to conclusions and see it like that)

@opal @Nezchan I think MIT has bigger problems with “Supporting Epstein” than whatever RMS. I haven't seen any one claiming RMS supports that sort of thing.

@ebel @Nezchan just means you have barely looked lol. people are coming up with reasons left and right to hate him

@ebel @codesections What about the freedom to express unpoopular and possibly retarded opinions? What about being inclusive of people with mental disorders ?

@yisraeldov @ebel @codesections It's a trade-off: if you're a public figure and especially a president or representative, what you say in public is inevitably related to the institution you represent.

That's why limited terms are a good thing: you give up some of you privacy and personal freedoms in order to serve a purpose. Later, when your term ends, you regain them.

@cadadr @ebel @codesections I have said and will say it again, RMS was not fit to be a public figure, he had some sort of mental disability. But keep in mind that I am an "ableist a**hole", what is everyone else's excuse for treating the disabled this way?

@yisraeldov @cadadr @codesections huh?

Even _if_ someone has a disability, or is neurodivergent, that doesn't mean an organisation should put that person forward to represent them, regardless of the consequences. Did you get your idea of anti-discrimination actions from Fox News or something?

@ebel @cadadr @codesections Hi ebel, This is exactly what I have been saying! I have said over and over that RMS should not have been the face of any organization.

Sorry don't know what Fox News has to do with anything, never have watched it.

@yisraeldov Do you think “being inclusive of disabilites” _requires_ someone/some org to never take a person's actions into account?

It's 100% possible to be non-abelist, and to say “RMS shouldn't be head of FSF”

@ebel I'm not 100% sure what I think about that. Would be happy to discuss it with you another time, but I need to get some work done right now. Ping me this evening.

@ebel There's no need to rebuild anything. Every single one of my users already is as diverse and unique an individual as any other.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!