<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div style="16px"><div style="16px">KDE would be the first organization not directly
linked to FSF to issue a
public statement on this. It would also come over a week after RMS'
statements gained media attention, and several days after his
resignation.<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">If we wanted to voice our desire for a more open FOSS community, we
should have done it before RMS resigned. OpenSUSE did exactly that,
issuing a statement on Sept.14 simply arguing that free software
must be free of abuse. No mention of Stallman, the FSF, or MIT.<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">Making
a statement similar to Red Hat's would be seen by the FSF as an
unwelcome intrusion into an internal discussion. A statement simply
supporting the FSF could be misconstrued as mourning the loss of RMS.<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">The
worst thing we could do is draw attention to what was said at Akademy
2009. If we didn't take enough action then, that is our failure. Ten
years later, associating ourselves with those remarks can only cause
undue harm to KDE.<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">I'm
glad to see RMS go, and I sincerely hope FSF can change into a more
inclusive and more effective organization. I know many in KDE feel the
same. But it's not our place to put additional pressure on the FSF at this time. They already took a big step forward by getting rid of RMS, even though it may have been personally difficult for many of them.<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">From a communications standpoint, the time for our comment has long since passed.<br></div></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">Sep 19, 2019, 04:08 by jens@ohyran.se:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div style="16px">I disagree with a lot of the ideological/sociological statements in<br></div><div style="16px">your comment, but will focus on the core point:<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">What we're suggesting is chosing someone that is objectively BETTER for<br></div><div style="16px">the FSF. The post isn't only technical in nature, but instead one of<br></div><div style="16px">community leadership, communication and philosophical guidance. <br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">With that in mind looking for the leader to better represent the FSF,<br></div><div style="16px">grow the Free Software movement, and improve its standing - makes the<br></div><div style="16px">choice for diversification a clear and simple one<br></div><div style="16px">(and that is ignoring the other arguments for those of us who do not<br></div><div style="16px">share your specific ideological/sociological beliefs)<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">/Jens<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">tor 2019-09-19 klockan 09:54 +0200 skrev Sven Brauch:<br></div><blockquote><div style="16px">Hi,<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">On Thursday, 19 September 2019 04:59:09 CEST Valorie Zimmerman wrote:<br></div><div style="16px">> Accordingly, I would like us (the KDE Community) to advise them to<br></div><div style="16px">> diversify their Board, as RedHat has done here:<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">I am against diversifying for diversifying's sake. It's something<br></div><div style="16px">that is <br></div><div style="16px">already way too prevalent in today's society.<br></div></blockquote><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><blockquote><div style="16px">Let's please pick the best <br></div><div style="16px">person for the job, regardless of race, gender, or whatever, and<br></div><div style="16px">let's <br></div><div style="16px">especially *not* write letters to others recommending them to do<br></div><div style="16px">otherwise.<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">Picking people with the argument of diversity achieves the exact<br></div><div style="16px">opposite of <br></div><div style="16px">what you want: it leads to people which are *worse* at their job than<br></div><div style="16px">the <br></div><div style="16px">competitors being selected for it. Thus doing this systematically<br></div><div style="16px">gives an <br></div><div style="16px">actual, real reason for prejudice against "people with $property in <br></div><div style="16px">$position".<br></div><div style="16px"><br></div><div style="16px">Greetings,<br></div><div style="16px">Sven<br></div></blockquote></blockquote><div style="16px"><br></div> </body>
</html>