• Mobocratic Egoist@lemmy.161.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    4 years ago

    I agree, but I’m also not sure the FSF itself needs to be leading the way. We need more organizations dedicated to free software, representing a diversity of schools of thought. FSF is just one perspective coming from a certain context and a different time period. More organizations will bring in fresh perspectives and people who may be more savvy in the modern web.

    • ufra@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 years ago

      Should these organisations be foundation type bodies or include product focused companies which advocate free?

      It’s a little uncomfortable to think FSF might not welcome any foundation type body which attempts to bring fresh perspectives to its turf, but it seems a possibility. Further splintering of not-proprietary (including free as well as open source) would also be counterproductive.

      Perhaps FSF clarifying their message for newer entrants and having several free product focused companies working in concert would be a viable approach?

      • Mobocratic Egoist@lemmy.161.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 years ago

        I am thinking of foundation-type bodies. Basically the FSF shouldn’t have a monopoly of ideas on the direction of the free software movement. The core philosophy is well-defined but personally I think the “single-issue” approach of the FSF is limited and we need to work in a broader political framework.

  • bringleborper@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 years ago

    “if the FSF doesn’t do something drastic to modernise itself, it’s going to be nothing more than a group of neck-beards discussing how evil proprietary software is.”

    Wow way to completely shit on the legacy of Free Software. It’s not about who the message is coming from but the message itself.

    • manemjeff@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 years ago

      Is it wrong though? Because that’s about what people in the general public knows about them right now. They definitely need a better pr and I dare say, a better more welcoming persona.

    • ckeen@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 years ago

      And what’s the message when the spokesperson of an organisation is not helping the organisation anymore because he alienates people participating, deterring newcomers and keeping others from participating is reinstated in the org’s board?

      Free Software is there and can live on without the FSF. That has been the whole point of this exercise.

      And if they welcome back RMS I don’t think things will change for the better. Good riddance to a stale and aged organisation then.

      And no, I don’t think a better logo, fancy videos or a social media person will remedy this. That’s just covering up the rust with paint.

  • Nevar@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 years ago

    This is not a bad take. As a young person who geeked out on progressive technology initiatives I’ve seen them stagnate over the years while new initiatives have come in that don’t embody quite the same values as the old guard, but are more modern and engaging. FSF could look to the FSFE for guidance, or maybe even a takeover.

      • Nevar@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 years ago

        I think OSI, EFF, FSFE, Platform Coop Movement, https://www.laquadrature.net/en/, and other all have similar goals to FSF, but with better and more modern presentation styles. Note I say similar because FSF is definitely one of a kind in their purity to the mission.

        • adrianmalacoda@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          I wouldn’t say OSI is similar at all to FSF in terms of goals. The OSI (in their own words) is concerned with open source as a development method for software. I would say those other organizations are FSF-adjacent but only the FSFE (as its name implies) has the same mission as the FSF

          Regardless, I agree in general - I think the FSF could learn a thing or two from EFF and FSFE.

          • Nevar@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 years ago

            I don’t disagree with you but I think I’m using a broader brush than you (the general aspect). Yes fair point OSI is focused on open source development method and not free, but to me the end goal is similar wrt giving software access to all and ending usurious monopolies.

            • BeFree@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 years ago

              Open Source will only change the monopoly rules, Free Software will destroy the game.

  • manemjeff@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 years ago

    You know what? That’s true. To get more contributors and new people in the project so it would live longer, FSF need to have a better PR management and image renewal. Not change, but something that could be adapted to the new world. Make things easier to search for example, or maybe use a more modern way of communication (maybe use rocket with threads)?