@aral @openrisk @jens

I'm tired of people being divided and attacking whole movements and organisations based on personality conflicts and ad-hominem attacks. It such an old strategy to divide and conquer.

Licenses are a powerful tool can and have been used to defend Free Software.

@jcast Yeah... that's part of the problem for sure.

I mean, I can't exactly expect leadership in any movement to fully align their views with mine. That would be arrogant.

I would like to at least be unaware of their more toxic views, however. I understand that that is somewhat willfully blind. But is it too much to ask of leadership to stay on topic when voicing their thoughts in public?

@aral @openrisk

@jens @aral @openrisk

I completely agree with you. It's hard not to let that derail you from what really matters for the movement, in particular when it is amplified by social media and tech news outlets.

@jcast

Here, we have (by my reading) a leader attack an organization within the same movement based on a personal dislike, which they disguise (quite badly) as an issue tenuously related to the movement, with smoothly executed trolling tactics.

This isn't just a lack of discretion. It's effectively an abuse of their leadership position.

I don't think we can expect to come together if we let our leadership get away with this.

Then again, protesting this amplifies the issue.

@aral @openrisk

@jcast
That manufactured Catch-22 already is part of the internet trolling handbook.

@aral @openrisk

@jens @aral @openrisk

Yes it's a fine tricky line there.
I think it's important to be aware the Free Software movement is always under attack, without the Stockholm syndrome.

@openrisk@mastodon.green @jens * s/just/must/