💾 Archived View for capsule.usebox.net › gemlog › 20210403-about-rms.gmi captured on 2023-09-08 at 16:05:34. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Posted Sat 03 Apr, 2021.
I have always found the Richard Stallman (RMS) persona difficult to deal with. This isn't new, or at least is not related to RMS' comments in 2019 that led him to resign from MIT and FSF.
Back in 2003 I was very active in a local FSUG (Free Software User Group), and I was a Free Software advocate. Back then LUGs (Linux User Groups) were more common, and I guess we went a bit further besides the technical bits of Linux and Open Source and touch a bit the ethical and philosophical side of software. I was one of the BSD guys back then, so in some way it made sense. We were diverse, and keen to discuss software licences.
Although our contact with the international scene was minimal, and indeed the FSF and RMS, we had contact with a number of speakers thanks to a local event we organised every year. We had a lot of technical talks, but also people like Ricardo Galli or Pedro Reina, that were more in the philosophical camp -IIRC Galli was an official FSF speaker at some point-. While Open Source tells you "how", these people put the focus on the "why".
And I can tell you that RMS back then was embarrassing. We accepted his role as founder and initiator, but it was hard to advocate some ideas being him the visible leader. Back then we didn't know of any misbehaviour from RMS, but things could have been easier being him less eccentric and more approachable. When you put the time and effort to understand what he means, instead of what it looks like he's saying, you can appreciate how smart he is and his "hacker" way of thinking; but to be honest, that's too much effort for the general public. It didn't help us, at least.
So now we are in a situation where there are two sides: some people are against RMS (and sometimes they look a bit like an angry mob to me; sorry), and some are supporting him (even if, generally, admitting he is not perfect; and I understand this because, as I say, I have been there myself).
Do I think that RMS time is over and that he should disappear from the front-line and leave FSF and GNU alone? There's no easy answer to this.
We owe RMS a lot. Granted that he's a difficult figure to deal with, but he has been consistently right in almost everything he has done in FSF and GNU (not without controversy, but that's always there if you want change). As Galli I think put it at some point, we need people like RMS that is a bit extreme sometimes, because that will be compensated by the attempts to silence him. Shame that that extra volume leaves some noise, too often.
I also feel for the man. He has sacrificed a lot for the GNU project (and the FSF). I can't avoid thinking that what is happening to him isn't fair, without removing an inch of responsibility from RMS himself, because this situation is basically "RMS being RMS" (which could be him having Asperger's; even if he denies it). I don't see a conspiracy here.
All that said, I think that perhaps the time for RMS is over now. We live in a different time, we have changed, but RMS has not.
Will be the FSF or GNU different without RMS? At this point, I don't think so; although I don't have real information to justify the feeling other than assuming that over the years, the people around RMS are likely to be aligned with his philosophy. Perhaps without a figure going to 11, like RMS, the FSF will be less relevant; but at this point RMS has attracted too much drama and is too distracting.
The FSF has won to some extent (and in some fields), but there's still a lot of work to do, and I firmly believe we need them; and I will always be grateful to RMS.