[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of

From: Corwin Brust
Subject: Re: The anti-GNU defamatory group of Ludovic Courtès - Re: assessment of the GNU Assembly project
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 13:28:45 -0500

Thanks Andrea.

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 12:08 PM Andreas Enge <> wrote:
I call out to the moderators of these mailing lists, if moderation indeed
still exists there, to act against such hate mail by Jean Louis singling
out an individual whose actions they disagree with:

Am Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 10:12:13AM +0300 schrieb Jean Louis:
> Ludovic Courtès (Guix)
> Ludovic Courtès
> Ludovic Courtès
> Ludovic Courtès

This cannot be qualified but as personal harrassment.


FWIW, I find the flood of replies demanding "evidence" and otherwise interrogating the concerns you express here to be excellent substantiation in and of themselves.

Peers devoted to free software,

Please reread the threads with an eye to how much good the topics most favored on this list have done and will do to draw people and public opinion to our cause.  I hope and expect we can move forward with a better tone and clearly visible mutual respect.  What I have seen is that our "work environment" has been and is becoming increasingly toxic.   

For example
 - Well respected philosophies are given kilobytes of air-time while any decent or nuance that could serve to evolve the tactics we apply in bringing these important points more successfully to the greater community are ignored or (more likely) heckled, pelted with platitudes and sophistry.
 - Any questioning of the greatness or suggestion of the fallibility of our esteemed founder is ridiculed.   Is Dr. Stallman so weak we must rush to deflect any unflattering commentary or views? 

I beg the assembly: don't rush to the aid of our principles nor our heros.  They can each take critique. They will grow only stronger for our honesty even as we become more able to attract and sustain more diverse viewpoints.  Moreover, your fellow community members are (or should be assumed to be) as capable as ourselves:  we are each responsible for separating signal and noise.  

Let me be very clear and direct:  when a woman wrote us to express personally and specifically her concerns around RMS we ran her off, and ran her down.  There's no place for that in this community, nor in any community dedicated to the public good.   It has nothing to do with the veracity much less universality of the concerns she took the time to share with us.   We should be grateful to anyone troubling to hold up the mirror.  If we find it distorted, and wonder why that soul searching should begin at home. When we finally show those questions, we must do so in a way that encourages and rewards the courage shown.  Little I've read on this list since the convention has conveyed we are able to do this, much less that we are committed to doing so.

Thanks for your consideration.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]