And this here is the fundamental issue in this entire conversation. This is barely about RMS to some, and more about screwing over a section of the population that is disliked.
RMS cannot hold the position effectively without drastically reducing the FSF ability to complete their stated mission. Full stop. This has been demonstrated by the very fact that these conversations are happening, as loudly and as presently as they are. And the choice to keep him in place is either horribly shortsighted, or an in
This is barely about RMS to some, and more about screwing over a section of the population that is disliked
Exactly. And the failure for FSF, RMS, or anyone involved on that side to actually address this is why a lot of groups are putting a bit of distance between them and the FSF.
RMS cannot hold the position effectively without drastically reducing the FSF ability to complete their stated mission
The FSF is an advocacy group. If there are people who aren't listening, then you are absolutely fucking right that they will fail at their mission of outreach. You do not have outreach if you do not have groups of people listening to you.
an intentional statement of "fuck the snowflakes" rather than anything about the ability for the FSF to be effective
And as HanzoSpam has demonstrated, this is absolutely the case. I've heard time and time again p
Shows that people like this guy [slashdot.org] are unable to adapt and want to change the conversation from "what's best for the FSF" to "fuck a bunch of snowflakes".
This is a debate between people who are high on the agreeableness scale, and people who are low.
Low agreeable people are the creatives (also high openness), who go against the grain. They are individuals who generally don't care what other people think, and go off and have new and interesting ideas. They are the artists who move into a run-down part of a city and make art, they are the entrepreneurs, songwriters, and playrights.
High agreeable people are group-ists: you value is only to the group, your value
He's fine to have opinions. I mean Christ, I've got nothing wrong with him "having opinions". The thing is, he wants to be in a position to "spread his opinions" and so, the acceptability of his opinions is pretty much the fucking point.
Realize that the other side doesn't hold your opinion not because they're stupid or because they don't understand your point, it's because they're different people.
I'm NOT saying that anyone is stupid. Being different is fine. But being a leader requires a bit of buy in on your thinking, that's kind of how leadership works. The people listening need to believe what's coming out of your mouth hole in order for that leadership thing
He's fine to have opinions. I mean Christ, I've got nothing wrong with him "having opinions".
I must say, that's very broad-minded of you. I'm sure some of your best friends are people with opinions too!
The thing is, he wants to be in a position to "spread his opinions" and so, the acceptability of his opinions is pretty much the fucking point.
Yes, this kind of thing shouldn't be tolerated. I mean, we're upstanding, civilized people - we can't have this kind of degeneracy among us. Those people can have whatever opinions they want, as long as they don't air them about and push them in our faces. What, are we going to have "opinion pride" parades next? There really should be some kind of law against this kind of thing - we could call it "don't ask, don't tell".
Jokes aside - is it only me who sees how the whole progressive movement becomes more and more like a real life illustration of "Animal Farm"?
The RMS "apology" sounds more like... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
Good for him. Let the snowflakes go fuck themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And this here is the fundamental issue in this entire conversation. This is barely about RMS to some, and more about screwing over a section of the population that is disliked.
RMS cannot hold the position effectively without drastically reducing the FSF ability to complete their stated mission. Full stop. This has been demonstrated by the very fact that these conversations are happening, as loudly and as presently as they are. And the choice to keep him in place is either horribly shortsighted, or an in
Re: (Score:4, Insightful)
This is barely about RMS to some, and more about screwing over a section of the population that is disliked
Exactly. And the failure for FSF, RMS, or anyone involved on that side to actually address this is why a lot of groups are putting a bit of distance between them and the FSF.
RMS cannot hold the position effectively without drastically reducing the FSF ability to complete their stated mission
The FSF is an advocacy group. If there are people who aren't listening, then you are absolutely fucking right that they will fail at their mission of outreach. You do not have outreach if you do not have groups of people listening to you.
an intentional statement of "fuck the snowflakes" rather than anything about the ability for the FSF to be effective
And as HanzoSpam has demonstrated, this is absolutely the case. I've heard time and time again p
Trait agreableness, from Big 5 personality (Score:5, Interesting)
Shows that people like this guy [slashdot.org] are unable to adapt and want to change the conversation from "what's best for the FSF" to "fuck a bunch of snowflakes".
This is a debate between people who are high on the agreeableness scale, and people who are low.
Low agreeable people are the creatives (also high openness), who go against the grain. They are individuals who generally don't care what other people think, and go off and have new and interesting ideas. They are the artists who move into a run-down part of a city and make art, they are the entrepreneurs, songwriters, and playrights.
High agreeable people are group-ists: you value is only to the group, your value
Re: (Score:4, Interesting)
Allow others to have their own opinions.
He's fine to have opinions. I mean Christ, I've got nothing wrong with him "having opinions". The thing is, he wants to be in a position to "spread his opinions" and so, the acceptability of his opinions is pretty much the fucking point.
Realize that the other side doesn't hold your opinion not because they're stupid or because they don't understand your point, it's because they're different people.
I'm NOT saying that anyone is stupid. Being different is fine. But being a leader requires a bit of buy in on your thinking, that's kind of how leadership works. The people listening need to believe what's coming out of your mouth hole in order for that leadership thing
Re:Trait agreableness, from Big 5 personality (Score:4, Interesting)
He's fine to have opinions. I mean Christ, I've got nothing wrong with him "having opinions".
I must say, that's very broad-minded of you. I'm sure some of your best friends are people with opinions too!
The thing is, he wants to be in a position to "spread his opinions" and so, the acceptability of his opinions is pretty much the fucking point.
Yes, this kind of thing shouldn't be tolerated. I mean, we're upstanding, civilized people - we can't have this kind of degeneracy among us. Those people can have whatever opinions they want, as long as they don't air them about and push them in our faces. What, are we going to have "opinion pride" parades next? There really should be some kind of law against this kind of thing - we could call it "don't ask, don't tell".
Jokes aside - is it only me who sees how the whole progressive movement becomes more and more like a real life illustration of "Animal Farm"?