>>109
No ha ocurrido nada concreto aún y probablemente no ocurra nada pero esta situación le hizo ganar más territorio a las corporaciones y más material para el próximo escándalo que ocurra.

Bruce Perens, cofundador del OSI, defiende a Stallman.
https://perens.com/2021/04/04/on-non-judicical-punishment-of-individuals/

>This leaves me somewhat surprised by the behavior of a number of companies and organizations that have emitted rather monochrome opinions. I would have everyone consider the issues I’ve discussed, and elaborate upon them, before they decide to cast stones.
No esperaba que uno de los fundadores de OSI fuera el primero en decir algo tan obvio.

>Some time ago, Mr. Stallman became the object of shunning. More recently, the board of the Free Software Foundation, his employer, decided to re-admit him to a seat on that organization’s board after having expelled him – with his own cooperation – for some time. In doing this, I believe that the FSF board felt that punishment should have an end, especially in the case of the first punishment, and should include an opportunity for the punished to demonstrate that he has reformed his behavior.
>FSF has been Mr. Stallman’s employer for about four decades. Thus, they are bound by the Americans with Disability Act and other applicable law to make accommodations for a handicapped employee. Mr. Stallman’s behavior clearly has a basis in his handicap.
Un libertonto anda diciendo estas puras verdades mientras que cientos de supuestos "progresivos" convenientemente ignoraron que Stallman sea medio aspie para apoyar una indignación artificial.

¿Ganamos?

AHI QUEARON

Nuevamente salen a la luz trapos sucios de Red Hat. Mediante nepotismo de parte de un solo director de FSF dos empleados de IBM/Red Hat quedaron a cargo del mailing list donde se discutía el futuro de la gobernanza de GNU.

>John Sullivan (outgoing FSF executive director) unilaterally decided that two Red Hat employees from this 6% minority faction should be given total control of a pre-existing GNU mailing list with a long history (gnu-misc-discuss), for purposes of moderating a debate over GNU governance.
>To make matters worse, it soon became apparent that inoffensive messages in support of RMS were being rejected, without explanation, by these two people (Mark Wielaard and Carlos O'Donell) who were among the most vocal advocates among the 6% for radically changing GNU governance.
>One of those inoffensive messages was forwarded to an internal GNU mailing list where GNU maintainers had been debating this issue privately. I was a first-hand participant in those discussions, and I asked anyone there (which included Mark Wielaard and Carlos O'Donell, whom I also CC'd) to justify why the message had been blocked, and no one even attempted to explain what was wrong with the message.
>At that point, it became clear to everyone without an axe to grind that new moderators were needed. Even if they hadn't been censoring legitimate messages in support of RMS, it was already a blatant conflict of interest that two employees of Red Hat (which had been acquired by IBM a few months earlier) should be moderating a discussion on GNU governance.
https://lwn.net/Articles/853027/

MUERTE A RH

Eso, recursos humanos despedido

Esto es lo que pasa cuando le das la mano a las corporaciones, te toman del hombro.

Si, tratar con recursos humanos es peor que hablar con una piedra. No ayudan en nada y cuando hacen algo "por el bien de los trabajadores" la joden más.

RRHH son los encargados de despedir empleados, no les tengo ni una pizca de estima.

>Betsy S met me at a lunch around 40 years ago. I am sure her recounting of her recollections is sincere, but she must have misunderstood the last thing I said to her. She said she didn't want an acquaintance with me. That no, on top of so many noes from others, impelled me to express despair; she seems to have misconstrued that as a demand.
>Betsy S, I regret that this misunderstanding caused you distress. I never intended to demand anything of you. I only ever wished you well.
https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-against-richard-stallman.html#suicide
Pobre Stallman. Me da pena y rabia lo que le hicieron.

>>168 solo son verdugos. No pueden hacer otra cosa.

Más o menos, en algunas pegas los RRHH son sapos de gerencia. En la pega en la que estoy igual son piola.

>>169
Stallman era un adolescente edgy de la escena que salía con mujeres manipulandolas con que se iba a cortar las venas? Ahora si es mi ídolo.

No hay esperanza para los románticos sin remedio.

"Mas o menos"
RRHH fue hecho desde su inicio para proteger a la empresa de sus trabajadores.

No, sirve para gestionar todo lo relacionado con la gente: contratar, entrevistar, despedir, preparar pagos, control de ausencias, enfermedad, horas extra, atender cambios de horario, días libres, relevos de horario, etc. Es un puesto más y suele acatar órdenes de la empresa porque para eso le pagan.

>The FSF does not depend on large single sources of funding. It accepts and appreciates support from corporations who want to give back by contributing to the development and advocacy for free software, but direct corporate support accounted for less than 3% of FSF revenue in its most recently audited fiscal year.
>The vast majority of FSF’s financial support comes from individuals – many, but not all, of whom choose to become associate members. At this moment, the FSF has more associate members than at any time in its history.
https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-board-frequently-asked-questions-faq
Parece que el FSF nunca estuvo realmente en peligro.

>At this moment, the FSF has more associate members than at any time in its history.
Lo que no te mata...