Find Free Software a New Voice

[geoffrey mendelson]

On Oct 9, 2011, at 6:56 AM, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
>
> There is a process that threatens any successful grass root  
> movement, of being hijacked by close but non-identical agenda.  
> People were worried that Microsoft might try to take over Hamakor,  
> but looking back, that was never a real threat. The real threat, one  
> that will never go away, is of someone who does not, prima facia,  
> seem alien taking over. Just like Greenpiece was taken over by the  
> anti-globalization movement (which is not the same as  
> environmentalizm), and just like Human Rights Watch was taken over  
> by the anti-Israeli movement (at least in the middle east section),  
> Hamakor was, is, and shall (hopefully) always will be in danger of   
> being taken over by similar but not identical agendas.

Even close to home was the Society for Prevention of Nature in Israel  
(SPNI). It originally was the society for Preservation, but they tried  
to fight a very well financed opponent on a building project. The  
builder had all of his employees, friends, etc join the SPNI and vote  
FOR his project.



> That is why I objected to Hamakor being too active in the anti- 
> biometric or, more recently, the social uprising. It's not that  
> these are not worthy causes. It's that these are not Hamakor's causes.

IMHO a very wise thing to do. (see below)


> With RMS the process is stranger, because rather than have a persona  
> change that causes this hijacking, this is one man's inability to  
> distinguish between personal and organizational agendas on the one  
> hand (such as the Israeli visit fiasco). On the other hand, a  
> personality attribute that used to be an asset (his drive to do  
> "what's right" regardless of, well, anything) that turned, due  
> mostly to the fact that the very movement he founded was so  
> successful, to a liability.

But that's not it. RMS founded the FSF with very specific goals. These  
goals are stated in the incorporation papers (which are on the FSF  
website) and their discussion (also on the website) why they chose the  
exact type of corporation they did.

As for RMS doing "what's right", this goes beyond it. We can argue  
about whether or not Emacs is wonderful, or Emacs is terrible, the GNU  
software model fosters innovation or stifles it, and so on, that's all  
within the scope of the FSF charter.

Once he discusses politics beyond FOSS, he is beyond the charter, and  
therefore out of the scope of the FSF. If he wishes to do so, he can  
do so as a private citizen, but he can not legally do so as President  
of the FSF, which he signed his screeds.

He simply did not know when to quit, and when to not use his position  
in the FSF community to make his voice stand out, where it should not.  
IMHO he is lucky that no one complained to the IRS (or at least it has  
not come out they did YET) and had their tax exempt status revoked,  
and to the Mass. Attorney General to have their incorporation  
rescinded (or whatever you call forcibly unincorporating).

It's not his dedication, but his hubris that was the cause of his, and  
probably will be the cause of the FSF's downfall.

All of the pundits decried the giving of OpenOffice.Org to the BSD  
people instead of the FSF. Not one mentioned that it just happen to  
occur during the middle of the FSF's anti-Israel push, and that Larry  
Ellison is a big supporter of Israel. While RMS was saying that he  
thought Israel mistreated the Palestinian Arabs, Ellison went to  
Sederot and saw what those same Arabs were doing to Israel.

I say this not to start a political discussion, just to point out that  
RMS sat in an office in Boston and made claims he had no way of  
knowing were true or not, while Ellison came and saw.

> Maybe RMS should be replaced, but replaced with what? You cannot  
> replace him as head of the FSF. Only the FSF can, and that is,  
> pretty much, controlled by RMS. You cannot replace him as FOSS's  
> spokesman, as he has not "held" that position for quite some time  
> (and many of the other candidates, such as Linus, have turned out to  
> be assholes too, on occasions).

That's true. The FSF may have to replace him to stay alive, it depends  
upon who RMS upset with his boycott Israel musings, and how much time  
and effort they want to put into acting upon it. For all we know there  
is a huge stack of complaint forms waiting to be read, or none.

Though really the FSF is sort of irrelevant. FOSS is well enough  
known, the GPL around long enough that it works (or maybe even would  
work better if people stopped mucking with it) and so on.

> So we can discuss this matter as much as we want, but we did not  
> give RMS this position, and we can certainly not take it away.


Sure we can. We can ignore him. We can release software under another  
license, not send the FSF money, not pay for RMS to come here to talk,  
and someone else does not attend the talks. In plain English, ignore  
him. If people do ignore him, the FSF funding will dry up, and he'll  
have to get a job. :-)

Geoff.


-- 
Geoffrey S. Mendelson,  N3OWJ/4X1GM