Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee

[Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com>]

> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 at 12:09 PM
> From: "Ian Lance Taylor" <iant@google.com>
> To: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> Cc: "Soul Studios" <matt@soulstudios.co.nz>, "GCC Development" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>, "Mark Wielaard" <mark@klomp.org>, "Nathan Sidwell" <nathan@acm.org>
> Subject: Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 4:33 PM Christopher Dimech via Gcc
> <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > Here is something close to the fundamental issue: Believing in private life,
> > that people are entitled to their own associations and opinions (even bad ones!),
> > and entitled to make their own mistakes, too — and that, barring some direct
> > connection to work life or extraordinary circumstance, that none of this is
> > the concern of the little platoons of finks lurking in the community,
> > particularly when driven by facebook lackeys muzzling everyday journalists
> > who go against the grain.  We see this not only here but also to medical
> > information dealing with coronavirus and vaccines.
> 
> Please work to avoid using terms like "finks" or "lackeys" when
> describing members of the GCC community.  Please be respectful of
> other people's opinions.  Thanks.
> 
> The question here is not whether RMS is permitted to contribute to
> GCC.  I have not seen anybody arguing against that.  The question is
> whether the GCC community should put him in a declared leadership
> position.  For a leadership position, which serves as an example for
> the community and to some extent demonstrates the values shared by the
> community, I think it is reasonable that there is a decreased
> expectation of privacy.

It is an unrealistic expectation.  I could understand such attitudes towards 
Harvey Weinstein and the like.  But now the scalp-hunting has started to target
ordinary and often obscure people, and the offenses in question have nothing
to do with bigotry — it is simply having the unfashionable view of a public
controversy, or being somehow associated, however lightly with that controversy.

You might say that the fullness of Thomas Jefferson’s legacy should be
acknowledged, but he did a bit more with his life than own slaves, just
as the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. did more with his time on earth
than cheat on his wife and Mohandas Gandhi did more than write racist
tracts about black Africans.  We remember those men, and celebrate them,
for other things.
 
> Ian
>