Re: Women and GNU and RMS (was Re: something else)

[Jean Louis]

* Alexandre François Garreau <galex-713@galex-713.eu> [2019-11-04 05:26]:
> Hi, I like discussion.  This so because I like language.  And therefore, 
> meaning.
> 
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 04:32:04 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> > Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.
> 
> I think you’re wrong about lunatism.  I think though mob attacks can seem 
> really lunatic, they’re made by disinformed persons that tend to keep a sort 
> of consistence within the few, probably unsufficient, knowledge they have 
> about 
> the situations they get in.

People who use computers, who know how to use Internet search engines,
who know how to read and who are just will find the facts and get
informed and verify information.

There are people who do not act by information, for which being
informed or being dis-informed really does not matter.

You are rational person. Why I say so? Because you are referring to
the fact that people are supposed to make their decisions or incite
actions on informed decisions.

You have just mentioned it. But there are types of people who are not
responding to being informed. They may even have all the knowledge
necessary, and will not regard the knowledge, facts, arguments as
being valid, because this type of people regards only emotions or
feelings of justice to be valid and to have the ultimate priority
before any facts.

And that is why lynching was prohibited!

Because carrying on with the justice based on emotions and feelings
does not bring any justice about, but injustice.

Political movements all over the world are using the phenomena that
one part of people may be moved by emotions, by feelings, by apparent
public propaganda what should be just, and they are inciting
divisions and wars, this is happening all over the world.

Lynching is form of ochlocracy. Ochlocracy is rule of government by
mob or mass of people.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching

Lynching is a premeditated extrajudicial killing by a group. It is
most often used to characterize informal public executions by a mob in
order to punish an alleged transgressor, convicted transgressor, or to
intimidate a group. It can also be an extreme form of informal group
social control, and it is often conducted with the display of a public
spectacle (often in the form of hanging) for maximum intimidation.
Instances of lynchings and similar mob violence can be found in every
society.

We do not speak of lynching here, but we do have analogy at hand. The
analogy is to the call-out culture.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call-out_culture#Cancel_Culture

Call-out culture (also known as outrage culture) is a form of public
shaming that aims to hold individuals and groups accountable for their
actions by calling attention to behavior that is perceived to be
problematic, usually on social media. A variant of the term, cancel
culture, describes a form of boycott in which someone (usually a
celebrity) who has shared a questionable or unpopular opinion, or has
had behavior that is perceived to be either offensive or problematic
called out on social media is "canceled"; they are completely
boycotted by many of their followers or supporters, often leading to
massive declines in celebrities' (almost always social media
personalities) careers and fanbase.

I think that defines pretty well what we are dealing here.

More citations from Ochlocracy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy

Ochlocracy (Greek: ὀχλοκρατία, romanized: okhlokratía; Latin:
ochlocratia) or mob rule is the rule of government by mob or a mass of
people, or, the intimidation of legitimate authorities. As a
pejorative for majoritarianism, it is akin to the Latin phrase mobile
vulgus, meaning "the fickle crowd", from which the English term "mob"
originally was derived in the 1680s.

The above terms are well connected to what we have here at hand.

There is GNU project and FSF, which was and is and will be
success. There was already well established organization, and there is
founder who as a person is very kind and always strive for justice by
all means. A thinker, forerunner, precursor, visionary.

There is observable phenomena that people who tend to join the
call-out culture, or mob incited justice, that such will not regard
any information, as they do not care about information, facts or
evidences.

I have installed wordnut package in my Emacs so to have quick access
to local Wordnet, and there is also online list of dictionaries on a
press of a button.

* Overview of noun lunatic

The noun lunatic has 2 senses (no senses from tagged texts)
1. lunatic, madman, maniac -- (an insane person)
2. daredevil, madcap, hothead, swashbuckler, lunatic, harum-scarum -- (a 
reckless impetuous irresponsible person)


* Overview of adj impetuous

The adj impetuous has 2 senses (first 1 from tagged texts)
1. (2) hotheaded, impulsive, impetuous, madcap, tearaway, brainish -- 
(characterized by undue haste and lack of thought or deliberation; "a hotheaded 
decision"; "liable to such impulsive acts as hugging strangers"; "an impetuous 
display of spending and gambling"; "madcap escapades"; (`brainish' is archaic))
2. impetuous -- (marked by violent force; "impetuous heaving waves")

In my opinion we are observing a phenomena of this time period that
could be best (maybe?) described as online and offline mob
justice. The phenomena is connected to terms such as "cancel culture",
it is connected to "social justice warriors" and to "being offended
and accusing for justice" and so on. It is type of bigotry.

* Overview of noun bigotry

The noun bigotry has 1 sense (no senses from tagged texts)
1. bigotry, dogmatism -- (the intolerance and prejudice of a bigot)

Thus when person is reckless, characterized by undue haste and lack of
thought or deliberation, irresponsible, for such person one could say
"lunatic". I do understand how word lunatic is strong word and it may
insult people, and I would not tell that.

I do not say that group of people who appear in those movements to
bring about justice are related. I think they are just picking up vibe
from each other and assume that it is right way to bring about
justice, even if necessary with aggression, or any kind of behavior,
without looking into any arguments.

That phenomena exist is obvious. I have not invented it. Without the
"joint statement" I would not even know about it. But phenomena is
cultural phenomena, only that its character does not apply to majority
of the world, it is currently present only in few countries in some
specific environments, and it also appears in media, mostly US media
that I know. It probably existed since ages, but for some reasons it
is now more visible.

After all those definitions, if we are to speak about GNU governance,
then we shall address the governance by its general types:

QUESTION A
==========

Should such governance get polluted or intertwined with mob type of
a justice? Should such governance be based on intolerance and
prejudices of bigots who speak loud while pretending to speak for the
whole group?

In this case, if this is acceptable for any organization, then I would
say let me get out of their space, as what is next to come will be
lynching, and nobody will be safe in such environment.

GNU project is not about policing behavior or thinking of other
people. It would be so wrong and so contrary to what Dr. Richard
Stallman was striving all the years.

 
QUESTION B
==========

- should it be a governance by means of rational decision? Should such
  governance stick to anchored and well established principle of
  justice such as "presumption of innocence"?

  That is why GNU project and free software philosophy speakers are
  using communication and rational thought, facts, arguments and
  evidences to bring about mutual understanding in society and not
  public shaming and call-out culture.

  If GNU project leader is not using public shaming and call-out
  culture, than such shall not be allowed in GNU project.

  Do you people know that Selam with her article did a lot of harm to
  FSF, and Richard Stallman, and GNU project, and now we bear harm in
  community for reasons that third party incited the fights. All
  without facts, without evidences.

  There is no true justice at hand, because RMS is kind person, and
  did not want to incite court processes. How tolerant is he when he
  is allowing the defamatory slander statements on Guix pages?

  RMS did not decide to sue people who defame him. That does not mean
  it cannot happen in future. He would win all the cases. But what
  injustice and what kind of punishment he received from few members
  of the GNU community? That is a big burden, big punishment that he
  received and all in the country of US that is supposed to be free
  speech country. Where associates and members are and were supposed
  to stand on the side of the legal justice system and defend RMS, as
  he did not commit any crimes to be punished that way.

  Just as Ruben said, nobody expects Spanish inquisition. It is humor,
  for those who are too serious.

In my opinion GNU project shall simply stay where it is, with its good
directions and FSF campaigns, and shall restrict any kind of proposals
to call-out anybody by public shaming and calling attention to wrong
behavior. Why? Because that is not a justice system, and no non-profit
organization shall serve the justice in that way for the reason it is
not a court of justice.

One way to do that is to recognize if somebody is being publicly
shamed for some speech or behavior which was not anyway connected to
GNU project or FSF, and then to reject such complaints and route
people to legal justice system. As if anybody was harmed by somebody's
behavior, they have justice system as a recourse. If anybody was
harmed by somebody's speech, they have legal justice system as a
recourse.

Reject public shamings, let people solve issues between themselves.

Do not divide community and stray away from purposes of free software
philosophy for reasons of mob justice.

Non-profits such as FSF, and also unincorporated associations such as
GNU project, can have their internal justice systems totally different
to government, and such system shall not be based or founded on any
principles that allow mob justice to take place.

Jean Louis