Re: GCC association with the FSF

[Alexandre Oliva <oliva@gnu.org>]

On Apr 10, 2021, Bronek Kozicki via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:

> It is called "actions have consequences".

FTR, what consequences do you believe would be adequate for such actions
as spreading difamatory rumors about an innocent person?

I ask because some of the people campaigning against RMS have already
disclaimed the false accusations in the hateful letter, but others keep
on resorting to them as if they were true and relevant.


Ironically, those who may have legitimate claims about difficulties in
dealing with RMS and who, for their position in the subproject, might
have to interact with him are not the ones engaging in disrespectful
conversations with users and potential contributors, offering them a far
worse amount of toxicity than anything that could be honestly attributed
to RMS, rather than setting a good example of kind and respectful
dissent for those who've just started participating in our community.


We've already seen that Nathan's frustration with RMS for supposedly
holding up a project he wanted to contribute was misdirected.  People
from neighboring projects, if willing to look honestly into the matters,
would find out that a lot of frustration misdirected at RMS is also
motivated by faulty assumptions.

That, plus the tiresome repeating of unfounded allegations and hearsay
mistaken as evidence, by a few loud individuals, makes for strong cases
of intolerance, witch hunting and scapegoating.

Such unkindness and intolerance do not belong in communities that wish
to be welcoming to contributors and users alike.


Responsibility that might normally be assigned to positions of
authority, and that AFAICT is attributed to Chief GNUisance, is IMHO a
mistake.

Chief GNUisance is not a position of authority over volunteers.  That
would be (-: gnonsense :-) , a deep misunderstanding of the dynamics at
play.  It's rather a position of purpose setting, strategic steering and
policy driving for the project as a whole.  It's not one of policing
contributor's thoughts or behaviors.  That requires authority over
individuals, which Chief GNUisance doesn't have.

If we find undesirable behaviors within our subprojects, we shouldn't
expect Chief GNUisance to send GNU Kindness Police to address it.
There's no such authority, no such power.

We are, rather, free and expected to behave like kind grownups, and
respectfully resolve issues among ourselves, according to policies set
for the project as a whole and for the subproject, if any.  Sort of like
some are trying to do to RMS, just with kindness and respect, and
directing it at someone who's actually engaging in misbehavior among us.


The rationale presented to justify a separation from any organization in
which RMS is involved, on the grounds that a lot of people would find
such a relationship intolerable, is questionable in the face of the
massive support for RMS's return to the FSF board, vs the hate letter
than is such a failure that they now even refuse to apply withdrawals
from undersigners who learned better.

If public image and community alignment were the issue, it would seem
like separation from all things RMS would bring onto us far more
community repproach and distrust than keeping things as they are.

Conversely, such a hate campaign, the false allegations, and the very
vocal and explicit intolerance to symptoms of the neurodiverse condition
of the target do the very opposite of signaling a welcome and safe
space, presented as rationale for these behaviors.

Right now I couldn't honestly recommend GCC as a welcoming or even as a
respectful community, and none of the unwelcoming and intolerant
behavior can be attributed to the favorite scapegoat.

Since some holders of opposing positions haven't been treating each
other kindly or respectfully, and it doesn't seem to me that holders of
any positions have made any progress in convincing holders of different
positions recently, may I suggest that we drop this hateful discussion,
or that participants at least bring the GNU Kind Communication
Guidelines back to mind?

Thanks,

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker  https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
   Free Software Activist         GNU Toolchain Engineer
        Vim, Vi, Voltei pro Emacs -- GNUlius Caesar