Very balanced take on the debate:
I 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.

@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....


@n8 OTOH, my main gripe with that article is the title, which pitches it as a "defense" of sort, whereas in reality is a criticism of the form of the open letter + an agreement on the requested course of action.

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 1

@zacchiro Yeah; agree. Sort of wonder how intentional that title was, but didn't really want to ask.

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!