Perhaps a Counter-Campaign would be Appropriate

[cmpunches]

After significant thought on the matter, and given how Molly has refused to address public inquiries, it is my proposal that a mirror of her open letter against RMS and the FSF be created to gather signatures for her removal from various organizations that she has associated with this criminal act.

I recommend this with hesitation, as, I do not want to see the same tactics she is using spring from my suggestion -- libel, cyberstalking, harassment are inexcusable. She should not be threatened -- it would only embolden her and give her ammunition to spin around into justification.

But, if her stance will be that her open letter is not in violation of the law or in codes of conduct or other policies on Github, Gnome Foundation, then perhaps an open letter demanding her removal with as many signatures might be advantageous to have exist as this develops.

Sometimes it is the canceler who should be canceled, and, I believe this is one of those situations.

[cmpunches]

Looking through my emails, I believe @dpocock has details on the "Whispering Networks" involved in similar campaigns that she has been running against others.

[dodobyte]

You don't fight cancel culture by becoming a canceller. I wouldn't worry about individuals. They're probably just trying to feel relevant.

[cmpunches]

Did you have any justification for why this should not take place, or is this an edgelord stonewalling type tactic from the opposition camp?

On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 19:27 -0700, JesseCharlie wrote:

No.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

[cmpunches]

I like your approach on it, you know, not sinking to their level -- nor do I suggest we should -- but there has to be some kind of consequence for these types of smear campaigns or they will continue to happen and they destroy lives sometimes.

Justice would demand some sort of community action.

On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 19:29 -0700, Dogan Kurt wrote:

You don't fight cancel culture by becoming a canceller. I wouldn't worry about individuals. They're probably just trying to feel relevant.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

[cmpunches]

@JesseCharlie actually it's in violation of the codes of conduct of almost every organization she is representing or using the infrastructure of to do it, and it does seem to be in violation of several state and federal laws. This is an overview of those violations:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210326090023/https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/issues/2250

She's not just expressing an opinion, she is trying to destroy someone with verifiable lies and she's engaging in a PR campaign to attract collaborators to that end.

[cmpunches]

@JesseCharlie actually it's in violation of the codes of conduct of almost every organization she is representing or using the infrastructure of to do it, and it does seem to be in violation of several state and federal laws. This is an overview of those violations: https://web.archive.org/web/20210326090023/https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/issues/2250

Proves my point, if true, that creating a counter petition is a bad idea.

Because.......?

[cmpunches]

This petition is a positive petition, in support of RMS. This hypothetical petition is a negative petition, against someone else, sharing an opinion.

@JesseCharlie ok, now see, that's a fair point.

I agree with the gist of what you're saying there. Not participating is a great way to set apart from an attacker.

But lets look at this from a community perspective -- these "types" of smear campaigns all end up having the same theme, and they keep turning out to be just that. The people that engage in them keep doing it without consequence to such an extent that it's become a formulaic strategy. At what point does the open source community realize that this is a vulnerability in our culture that is being exploited, and that this repeated exploitation will eventually destroy it without some sort of cultural hardening?

So if canceling the cancelers isn't acceptable (it is in my opinion an ironic justice), what options are there to deter this kind of thing?

Well, one is ignore it and hope it goes away, and "sorry about all the casualties" it creates.

Another is to make the effort more expensive. What would you suggest to remedy the bigger problem exemplified by Molly's campaign? Letting these people continue to damage people at great reward with impunity? That doesn't sound like a winning strategy.

[6r1d]

@cmpunches, after the removal of your issue on rms-open-letter, I think the very important thing to do is to add another markdown file detailing the violations of "rms-open-letter" in this repo and have it mirrored a lot. :-)

I am not competent enough to talk about a counter-campaign, but I very much want to protect Richard's name.

[cmpunches]

@cmpunches, after the removal of your issue on rms-open-letter, I think the very important thing to do is to add another markdown file detailing the violations of "rms-open-letter" in this repo and have it mirrored a lot. :-)

I am not competent enough to talk about a counter-campaign, but I very much want to protect Richard's name.

@6r1d Thanks for tracking the issues. I am receptive to revising and putting together a packet and submitting a pull request, however, the opposition camp does intend to blatantly ignore all questioning about this while she recruits signatories on social media swayed by these lies. This whole approach feels like a chess game where only one side is trying to win, and, someone will have to.

Can we not mount a response of consequence?

[6r1d]

This whole approach feels like a chess game where only one side is trying to win, and, someone will have to.

Huh, that's an interesting point. Thanks for explaining that.

Can we not mount a response of consequence?

Sure, a lot of people have their copies, anyway.

[shenlebantongying]

Maybe it should be put on another repo? This might add extra content that previous signers not aware of.

Besides, the next FSF meeting is sunday, mar 28. This open-letter vs support-letter is already quite fierce tension. There are fighting everywhere.

[cmpunches]

Maybe it should be put on another repo? This might add extra content that previous signers not aware of.

@shenlebantongying could not agree more. I would insist that any counter-response not related to your existing support letter be treated as separate projects so as not to sully the positive nature of your effort.

What I don't know about is what options are available or what strategy people would go with. I have ideas but would want to have discussions dedicated to that in a separate project context.

[cmpunches]

Would it be acceptable for me to leave my email address in case anyone wants to reach out for a collaborative discussion along these lines?

[purplesyringa]

Besides, the next FSF meeting is sunday, mar 26

I had to check the calendar. It's Mar 28 actually.

[nukeop]

I advise everyone supporting this letter to attempt no contact with the signatories of the other letter yet. For now, let's focus on winning. Depending on how the situation evolves, and what decision FSF will make, we will adjust our strategy accordingly. At the moment, I ask out letter signatories to not make issues in the rms-open-letter repo, and not contact their signatories through any other channels.

[cmpunches]

I would have to agree with that for the time being to avoid deliberately deceitful narratives like the one from @void-witch linked earlier. Just because someone doesn't know what they're talking about doesn't mean that their disinformation isn't listened to, so, avoiding giving that crowd ammunition is appropriate.

I do think that there should be serious consequences for their behaviour, beyond an effort to disrupt their defamation campaign, but I want them to be consequences within the bounds of the law and of proper timing.

[pizdjuk]

I advise everyone supporting this letter to attempt no contact with the signatories of the other letter yet. For now, let's focus on winning. Depending on how the situation evolves, and what decision FSF will make, we will adjust our strategy accordingly. At the moment, I ask out letter signatories to not make issues in the rms-open-letter repo, and not contact their signatories through any other channels.

The topic starter has right. It would be effective to start campaign against the Molly. BUT, with the matter of her position. Nothing about her personal activities. But for her qualification to recognize the problems she needs to fight for. To be honest.

And second, IMHO the time for it should be later, after clearing the situation with RMS.

[ghost]

chris, drop the bullshit. we all know that twitter account was you

the user void_witch2 on twitter was previously lord_bagira: https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://twitter.com/lord_bagira*

here is their youtube account, notice they mention "SILO GROUP LLC": https://web.archive.org/web/20210328001545/https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYC8elg_-VBcbKOJ2eOFLaw/about

and here's their github, where they mention they work for (drum roll) silo group: https://web.archive.org/web/20210328033439/github.com/cmpunches

here's a tweet from lord_bagira that is now a tweet from void_witch2: (lord_bagira) https://web.archive.org/web/2020*/https://twitter.com/lord_bagira/status/1343477220627673088 (void_witch2) http://web.archive.org/web/20210328002048/https://twitter.com/void_witch2/status/1343477220627673088

c'mon bud. we can disagree like adults. you can even call people assholes on twitter. but the moment you start using my username to try and drag my shit through the mud, that's bullshit. if your opinions are correct as you believe, you wouldn't need to resort to bullying, lying, intimidation, and impersonation

i genuinely do not care that we disagree. i care that you're trying to hurt me because of it. let's all just agree to disagree here before one of us gets really hurt, alright? i've not done anything to you, but you keep escalating. drop it.

[cmpunches]

@void-witch I refuse to discuss this with you other than to openly call you a defamer, a failed forger (check your links, there's nothing there), and a harasser. Under no circumstances should you contact me again either directly or through third parties unless it is relayed from your attorney to mine, who will be less paid than mine.

[ghost]

so we're in agreement that this should be dropped, then?

[cmpunches]

@void-witch that is contact. This is your final notice, in public, that you are not to contact me.

[ghost]

you're the one pinging me and impersonating me. ball's in your court, bud

[cmpunches]

@here she has been blocked and appropriate legals will start. Sorry for the disruption.

[6r1d]

This is important, @cmpunches . I won't ask you to provide all the details in GitHub issue comments. While I'm interested a lot, it can influence the legal process if you phrase something improperly.

@nukeop , what do you think?

[jobbautista9]

@cmpunches @void-witch Both of you, please stop for a moment. Haven't you considered that somebody else is trying to impersonate both of you? The Twitter account was created in March 2021. Somebody could be false-flagging.