Here's another unplanned post before the planned closing one, prompted by attempts to portray my series of posts as attacks on the FSF.

My posts, and actions, are rather in defense of the FSF from:

  • pressure, external and internal, to swerve it off the course set and recently reaffirmed by its directing body;

  • actions that defy the given guidance; and

  • misinformation and maneuvers that have succeeded in containing the reaction for some time.

Had there been decisions to change course, properly communicated to staff, members and to the public at large, it might make sense to paint me as a disgruntled internal attacker. But no such things happened.

What happened were plans and actions kept from objecting parties and, once information got across, misinformation and intimidation to block reactions, to enable continued action in deviation from the guidance and thus from the authority delegated by the board.

I have no reason to doubt a large majority of staff believed to be following given guidance and acting in good faith, just kept in the dark and misinformed like members and most (all?) of the board.

But the communication walls and misinformation, the blatant bias in so-called mistakes, and most of all the stalling and refusal to take corrective actions made for a very clear pattern of subversion of authority to turn the RMS-founded FSF into an RMS-less, post-RMS FSF.

Yet some still insist it's neither a coup nor an attack on the FSF.

So blong...