Statement on Richard Stallman rejoining the FSF board

https://www.zdnet.com/article/return-of-stallman-to-fsf-sparks-outrage-among-open-source-and-free-software-leaders/

https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/red-hat-statement-about-richard-stallmans-return-free-software-foundation-board

FSCI's statement on Richard Stallman's rejoining the FSF board

Free Software Community of India is deeply disappointed to learn that Richard Stallman rejoined the FSF board. The way it was announced without any apology or assurance of any change of public behavior of Richard Stallman is also disturbing. The decision was taken without any broader community engagement or transparency[Tweet link here].

We believe that this step will be harmful to the free software community and also makes us doubt the decision making process of FSF board.

Richard Stallman seems oblivious towards feelings of other people interacting or working with him and when others provide feedback about this conduct, he doesn't seem to acknowledge the shortcomings in his behaviour. This makes his public conduct discouraging for many people to participate in activities of Free Software which involves him.[1][2][3][4][5].

Over the years, many people close to RMS tried to explain him the consequences of his words and actions at a leadership position.

Bradley Kuhn who worked for over 20 years with RMS said "I attempted to argue with him at length to convince him that some of his positions were harmful to sexual assault survivors and those who are sex-trafficked, and to the people who devote their lives in service to such individuals. "

Matthew Garrett says "I've spent a lot of time working with him to help him understand why various positions he holds are harmful. I've reached the conclusion that it's not that he's unable to understand, he's just unwilling to change his mind."

FSCI ensures that people in the community feel welcomed and ensures inclusivity. How does FSCI makes decisions?

[1] https://nitter.mastodont.cat/thebaughj/status/1374882579325673472?s=20

[2] https://nitter.snopyta.org/paulnivin/status/1374499598853545986

[3[ https://nitter.tedomum.net/FOSSfirefighter/status/1374139049468919809?s=20

[4] https://opensourcetogo.blogspot.com/2009/07/emailing-richard-stallman.html?showComment=1247268813706#c27106541698438970135

[5] Bradley Kuhn's statement http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html

[6] Sam Hartman finally broke his silence on RMS https://hartmans.livejournal.com/100652.html?

[7] Matthew Garrett https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html

[8] FSF Europe statement https://fsfe.org/news/2021/news-20210324-01.en.html

[9] Statement by EFF https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/03/statement-re-election-richard-stallman-fsf-board

Richard Stallman shows no sensitivity towards other's feelings and does not consider other's feedback which makes his public conduct discouraging for many people to participate

This can be
Richard Stallman seems oblivious towards feelings of other people interacting or working with him and when others provide feedback about this conduct, he doesn't seem to acknowledge the shortcomings in his behaviour. This makes his public conduct discouraging for many people to participate in activities of Free Software which involves him.

Also, a very important point - "The way it was secretively announced ". It was not secretively announced, in fact it was announced live in LibrePlanet conference. We could say that it was suddenly announced and the decision was taken without any broader community engagement or transparency. You can also link the tweet/toot by FSF stating that even any libreplanet volunteer or staff member didn't know that this was going to be announced.

Can you please give me the tweet link here? And I have made the changes according to your comments. Thanks.

Further question: Should we add something on how it affects the free software movement? because many people say it does not matter as you can go on promoting free software in your life.

@Pirate Praveen I have written a statement. I think my statement can be improved. The main thing I have done is adding references to the statements of some close friends of RMS.

I think you can make this as a proposal and see which one get more votes.

I am not very enthusiastic about my statement. I would like to suggest that it is very important to add references to back up your claims. Especially, adding statements by people who worked with RMS.

Bradley Kuhn said "When the escalation started, I still considered RMS both a friend and colleague, and I attempted to argue with him at length to convince him that some of his positions were harmful to sexual assault survivors and those who are sex-trafficked, and to the people who devote their lives in service to such individuals. More importantly to the FSF, I attempted to persuade RMS that launching a controversial campaign on sexual behavior and morality was counter to his and FSF's mission to advance software freedom, and told RMS that my duty as an FSF Director was to assure the best outcome for the FSF, which IMO didn't include having a leader who made such statements." http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html

Sam Hartman said "Rms has demonstrated that he cannot hold to standards of respect for others, respect for their boundaries, or standards of community safety. We need those standards to be a welcoming community." https://hartmans.livejournal.com/100652.html?

Matthew Garrett said "I've spent a lot of time working with him to help him understand why various positions he holds are harmful. I've reached the conclusion that it's not that he's unable to understand, he's just unwilling to change his mind." https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html

Further, we can show agreement with Matthew Garrett on this point

The argument that in a pure technical universe Richard Stallman's insensitivity is irrelevant and we should instead only consider what he does in free software is bullshit.

If you would like to accept comments by autistic people(we have no way on knowing that they are autistic) then https://nitter.snopyta.org/HickeyWriter/status/1172674056828661764 says that being autistic is not an excuse for bad public behaviour.

I have added some of these quotes and references.

Thanks. I am personally fine with the RedHat statement but I think it is better not to put that(people will say they are IBM funded so why take risk if you can do better?) in the final write-up on the website. It is however good to add EFF, FSFE, Debian, KDE statement in the final write-up.