muckrights-sans-merde
bonum fabula frat
### what-muckrights-wont-tell-you-about-the-coup
other pages:
=> why-msm.html why-msm
*originally posted:* apr 2021
this website started because muckrights chose to keep the public misinformed and uninformed about the latest (i would argue biggest ever) coup going on in the gnu project.
i think its a great disservice to the movement (and a boon to the coup itself) to pretend that everything is alright, to not give the public any information about whats going on. the fsf went silent about stallman leaving too, going so far as to censor messages of support on their mailing lists. these days, muckrights is little more than a mouthpiece for the fsfs public relations consultants. their strategy? hide problems, say theyve been through all this before, and take a thatcher-like approach with the media.
in 2019, during the guix petition coup, i took note (and muckrights commented on it) of patterns that connected the guix coup with other similar coups. ive gone as far as to say theyre all the same coup, but they can also be looked at as a series of connected ones. muckrights used to acknowledge this problem: http://techrights.org/2020/11/06/my-deep-concerns-coc/
now they pretend it doesnt exist: http://techrights.org/irc-archives/irc-log-techrights-220421.html
```
schestowitz Notice how Andy's Wingo's dumb "gnu is not uniform"
(GNU) BS vanished Apr 22 07:32
schestowitz only LWN and Phoronix mentioned it once and that was it Apr 22 07:32
schestowitz another failed coup effort Apr 22 07:32
schestowitz very much failed Apr 22 07:32
```
what is muckrights hiding from its audience? the fact that the 2019 coup is still ongoing, and that its much too soon to dismiss the latest effort as a non-event.
theres no need to post both the guix petition list https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ and the gnu.tools "people" page. we can compare them here:
of the guix petition, about half the names dropped off-- but there is more to say about those. both lists are about the same length.
of the people who didnt make it from the guix petition to the people page, at least two were former fsf staffers (including one gnu developer) while the rest were gnu developers.
the projects those people worked on (according to the guix petition itself) are:
* GCC, GCC, GCC, GCC, GCC, GFortran
* GNU libc, GNU libc, GNU libc, GNU libc
* GNU Binutils, GNU Binutils, GNU Binutils
* GNU Octave, GNU Octave
* GNU Emacs, GDB, Guix
* GNU gettext, GNU libiconv, GNU libunistring, GNU Social
so obviously that part of the petition is no longer represented at gnu.tools-- right?
lets look at the overlapping project affiliations from the people on the gnu.tools people page...
Andreas Enge (GNU MPC, GNU Guix)
Andrej Shadura (GNU indent)
Carlos O'Donell (GNU C Library, GNU Compiler Collection (GCC))
Dale Mellor (GNU Mcron, GNU Guix)
David Malcolm (GNU Compiler Collection (GCC))
Efraim Flashner (GNU Guix)
Jack Hill (GNU Guix)
Jason Merrill (GNU Compiler Collection (GCC))
Jeff Law (GNU Compiler Collection (GCC))
Jonathan Wakely (GNU Compiler Collection (GCC))
Leo Famulari (GNU Guix)
Ludovic Courtès (GNU Guile, GNU Guile-RPC, GNU Guix, GNU Shepherd)
Léo Le Bouter (GNU Guix)
Marius Bakke (GNU Guix)
Mark J. Wielaard (GNU C Library, GNU Compiler Collection (GCC), GNU Classpath)
Mathieu Othacehe (GNU Guix)
Ricardo Wurmus (Guile-Debbugs, GNU Guix, Guix Workflow Language)
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice (GNU Guix)
Tobias Platen (GNU Guix, GNU LilyPond)
so if we remove those projects from the summary of dropoffs, we get:
* GFortran
* GNU Binutils, GNU Binutils, GNU Binutils
* GNU Emacs, GDB
* GNU gettext, GNU libiconv, GNU libunistring, GNU Social
if we choose to go by project affiliation, i would say its more like a quarter dropoff than half.
even if you choose to ignore the overlaps there, lets simply look at the overlap in people. these people signed the guix petition and are on the gnu.tools people page:
* Ludovic Courtès (GNU Guix, GNU Guile)
* Ricardo Wurmus (GNU Guix, GNU GWL)
* Andreas Enge (GNU MPC)
* Samuel Thibault (GNU Hurd, GNU libc)
* Carlos O'Donell (GNU libc)
* Andy Wingo (GNU Guile)
* Mark Wielaard (GNU Classpath)
* Werner Koch (GnuPG)
* Christopher Lemmer Webber (GNU MediaGoblin)
* Jan Nieuwenhuizen (GNU Mes, GNU LilyPond)
* Tom Tromey (GCC, GDB)
* Jeff Law (GCC, Binutils — not signing on behalf of the GCC Steering Committee)
* Han-Wen Nienhuys (GNU LilyPond)
* Ian Jackson (GNU adns, GNU userv)
* Tobias Geerinckx-Rice (GNU Guix)
* Andrej Shadura (GNU indent)
* Jonathan Wakely (developer on GCC)
* David Malcolm (developer on GCC)
so who signed on thats new?
* Ben Pfaff (GNU PSPP)
* Bernard Giroud (GnuCOBOL)
* Christian Mauduit (Liquid War 6)
* Dale Mellor (GNU Mcron, GNU Guix)
* Efraim Flashner (GNU Guix)
* Frederic Y. Bois (GNU MCSim)
* Jack Hill (GNU Guix)
* Jason Merrill (GNU Compiler Collection (GCC))
* Jean Michel Sellier (GNU Nano-Archimedes, GNU Gneural Network, GNU Archimedes)
* Leo Famulari (GNU Guix)
* Léo Le Bouter (GNU Guix)
* Marius Bakke (GNU Guix)
* Mark Galassi (GNU Dominion, GNU Scientific Library)
* Mathieu Othacehe (GNU Guix)
* Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos (GNU Libtasn1)
* Tobias Platen (GNU Guix, GNU LilyPond)
but as i said-- this isnt exactly new: https://gnu.wildebeest.org/blog/mjw/2020/01/28/a-mission-statement-and-social-contract-for-gnu/
thats the blog from one of the people who signed the petition and is on the gnu.tools page. i talked about this in 2020, and muckrights and i eventually went our separate ways-- i continued to talk about the coup, and ron decided to start downplaying it instead.
i cant tell you which of us will be right, only that i find the approach at muckrights to be dishonest, misleading and revisionist.
i suppose you have a choice, whether you want to fight open source with facts and context, or whether you want to fight open source with open-source-like propaganda or revisionism. i still prefer facts and context.
=> https://muckrights-sans-merde.neocities.org