It hasn't been since at least fall 2019, when he stepped down. He hasn't been involved (at least on paper!) for over a year now, and the FSF has presumably been functioning between then and last Saturday.
It hasn't been since whenever Stallman's rider started including explicit instructions that his speaking fees should be sent to his personal mailing address and made out to his personal bank account, not the FSF treasury, not even to his personal assistant employed by the FSF. https://github.com/ddol/rre-rms/blob/master/rider.txt#L725-L...
And maybe it is in practice despite all that, but should it be? That's not their mission statement, and I think, for instance, that very few software authors would have been willing to say "or, at your option, any later version published by the Stallman Foundation" - let alone transfer their copyrights to the Stallman Foundation. Free software developers including myself entrusted the FSF with the ability to control our work precisely because the FSF was not just one guy, it was an organization that claimed to represent the entire free software movement.
So... You suddenly realized the value you handed off, and are annoyed because you can't take them back? I mean, personally, I don't think IP rights (if we have to suffer them to exist) should be transferrable. It should either be utilized by the person who did the work, or w
waived into the public domain.
Nevertheless, you never had any guarantee FSF would always be run by people, or run how, you like. You knew this. You did it anyway. What is it they say today? "There are consequences."
You can't take it back. Once it's out there, it's out there. That was the point! Nor does it at all Change that Stallman has done absolutely nothing to deserve ousting, nor does his reinstatement detract from FSF or it's mission.
Looked into the rider; good for him; he's bringing it in, he should get a choice in where it goes. Also, makes me wonder why. Given Stallman's dedication, I have to wonder what the Foundation has been up to that's got him feeling like he's got to take care of himself first, but heck, maybe he just got tired of having to rely on the charity of others? I know in his position, (particularly nowadays) I'd not feel a great degree of trust in the face of my peers.
I'm just in awe of the fact he's even gone back, and throughout the entire thing kept advocating for FSF. That's commitment.
After thumbing through the Twitter thread, came across this gem:
>I worked at the FSF from 2015-2018 & was shop steward for a while. I recall having a months (MONTHS) long conversation with ED John Sullivan about why racist & sexist 'hacker humor' from the 90s needed to be removed from http://gnu.org. rms didn't get why it was harmful.
So... Someone had a subculture clash, and totally failed to attain enlightenment? Or to even appreciate the importance of maintaining a historical record to change and develop over time?
Seriously, this sounds like the kind of person who'd advocate having all old periodicals available in libraries re-written to the moral standards of today to protect the sensibilities of the youth.
The problem I have sympathizing with all of this is that if these same exact circumstances happened to any other member of the FSF, I'd be in the same uproar. You don't hang someone out to dry because people got hysterical because someone couldn't read, or because other people don't like that someone else is using their right to speak their mind.
