Re: Truth matters when writing software and selecting leaders

[Jean Louis]

* shulie <shulie_release@optimum.net> [2021-03-27 21:28]:
> On 3/24/21 10:13 PM, Akira Urushibata wrote:
> > In response to the storm of criticism, the FSF Board has decided to
> > vote to determine whether RMS should return to the board.  I observe
> > that both sides have initiated petition drives
> 
> The FSF just makes itself impotent and irrelevant like this.  It needs
> to take a stand on due process, tolerance and justice.

FSF is already in the process and while I am not in US, I am sure they
do consider various public facts, but I think they should not. As
letter of support to RMS or letter of absence of support does not
change anything, and putting focus on activities that do not support
FSF campaigns waste time and effort.

The apparent problem could be said with the public image -- but we can
observe that many organizations move on with their purposes
regardless.

In my opinion it is more important to stick to promotion of purposes
rather than handling what some people organized on Github.

>From legal viewpoint of Articles of Incorporation or By-laws, FSF is
not necessarily there to protect or involve itself in public speech,
but can do so if they wish.

It is there to promote free exchange of software. It does so by
supporting GNU and free OS-es.

Because the FSF's legal foundation is not well defined it opens door
to inclusion of decision making people who may deviate FSF purposes to
be something else than what it was meant to be. 

Jean