Post A5pdN858uumRoMfKXQ by federico3@mastodon.social
 (DIR) More posts by federico3@mastodon.social
 (DIR) Post #A5pXqkHZMtPkxdDViq by zacchiro@mastodon.xyz
       2021-04-02T08:27:41Z
       
       0 likes, 2 repeats
       
       Very balanced take on the #Stallman debate: https://www.arp242.net/rms.htmlI do not agree with all of it, but I can get behind the criticism of specific passages in the open letter and the judgment on the fitness for leadership of rms is shared.
       
 (DIR) Post #A5pdN858uumRoMfKXQ by federico3@mastodon.social
       2021-04-02T09:35:28Z
       
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       @zacchiroReading the open letter I was also surprised at how it focused exclusively on some issues and used very strong phrasing while also ignoring many other behaviors that don't make RMS a suitable spokesperson for any movement.
       
 (DIR) Post #A5s4geZHRdW396DTKS by lxo@gnusocial.net
       2021-04-03T13:50:49Z
       
       2 likes, 0 repeats
       
       stefano, would you spell out what passages of the letter you signed you can now "get behind" in criticism?  I suppose some people might never forget that you signed it, even if you were to publicly retract it altogether (we've both seen how honest retraction is framed by distrusting opponents), but others might have some of their trust in you restored by your spelling out your own more balanced analysis of the letter and of the situation.  I suggest it because I assume you're not pushing for a schism in the movement; feel free to ignore otherwise
       
 (DIR) Post #A5s8rj5vM5O4Bd1LAu by n8@mastodon.social
       2021-04-03T09:26:31Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @zacchiro Yeah; I appreciated that one as well. It noted several of the things about the open letter that I was extremely uncomfortable with, like citing items as absolutes or patterns with only one specific example. I'm aware, of course, through personal conversations, of other examples (and their numbers), but I get really hung up on rhetoric — a sword that has double (or more) edges and easily backfires. If I can mix those metaphors....
       
 (DIR) Post #A5s8rjSG13FfItTAzA by n8@mastodon.social
       2021-04-03T09:33:52Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @zacchiro Just as importantly, I think that article does a good job of keeping focus on behavior and actions. Other critiques often slipped quickly between the list of objectionable actions and labelling RMS as person (if somebody "does" bad vs somebody "is" bad), which I think is rhetorically dangerous. i.e., once someone "is" bad, nothing they can do can restore them. When in reality, he could have changed his behavior, but he didn't. It feels less satisfying, but it's provable.
       
 (DIR) Post #A5s8rjqMZQXAVekQYi by n8@mastodon.social
       2021-04-03T09:35:45Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @zacchiro (Also I suspect that the "is" rhetoric probably stirs up the more vehement reactions and conspiracies, but that may just be entirely my imagination. Anyway, back to procrastinating....)
       
 (DIR) Post #A5s8rkGaztW9p11NRo by zacchiro@mastodon.xyz
       2021-04-03T10:40:40Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @n8 yeah, that part has definitely struck back