[gopiandcode]

Software that removes the freedoms of its users is a moral injustice and the FSF has always fought against such injustice. I don’t see how capitulating to lies to satisfy a witch hunt based on slander, and thereby perpetuate an injustice, would help strengthen FSF’s commitment to fighting against the injustice of proprietary software. If all it takes for the FSF to stand by injustice is a misinformation campaign and sufficient bad PR, then what happens when proprietary companies start applying the same tactics to free software? will the FSF step back again, to avoid accruing too much bad PR? Sometimes in life it is difficult to make the right decision, but we must do it nonetheless.

[rbanffy]

I wouldn't call it slander.

- Stallman is a divisive figure, with questionable opinions outside the realm of free software, opinions he published himself, willingly.

- He multiple times ignored the contributions of women, and did so after being corrected.

- Lots of women feel uncomfortable close to him due to his behavior. Some of that may be involuntary.

- The board reinstated him without an announcement, prior discussion involving the broader community. The announcement surprised everyone except the board and the host event had do clarify they were not part of it.

- He refuses to acknowledge how all these things damage the reputation of the FSF.

All this could be avoided by doing absolutely nothing. He resigned, after all.

[gopiandcode]

Have you read the open letter? The points you list above are a lot more milquetoast than the "evidence" against RMS that was posted on the open letter - it performs such disingenuous actions as quoting statements that RMS has since retracted or changed, refusing to admit the fact that he has changed; mischaracterising his suggestion of alternative pronouns as a transphobic attack when in fact RMS has stated that he himself will respect people's personal pronouns; underplaying the vicious media attack that was launched against him.

While the claims you make in your comment might not be slander, the open letter is much less nuanced, and strays a lot closer to that line.

[rbanffy]

The point remains the FSF board would have better executed its mission of protecting the FSF by doing absolutely nothing. There was no desperate need to reinstate Stallman. Have they failed to produce any other leaders inside the organization that could take it and move it forward? Isn't there anyone else who could lead it? Stallman won't be able to front it forever and he already conveniently stepped aside. He's still the founder of the movement, and that he'll always be, but the noise he created for no good reason makes it clear he's unfit to lead this movement.

[yesenadam]

Every word of that seems right to me, but –

You don't seem to care if the anti-RMS petition was slander or not. Whether it was all true or all false. The person who wrote it also seems not to care. Why not?!

I read it and looked into its claims, and was very surprised that none of them seemed to actually be true. The people who signed it presumably took its truth on faith, like you seem to be doing. Either that or you and they don't care. Imagine for a second it was you being slandered in such a way. After totally transforming your field for the better, around the world!