Richard Stallman and the GNU project

If 90% of a group want stuff to go one way, the group goes that way, or collapses; they can just leave and form a new group. Moreover, in a case like that, they could effectively exclude other people; people cursing will be excluded from any but formal discussions they can't be excluded from. Drinkers will be shunned.

> When I encounter difficult people in an organization which I have agreed to be a part of, I both minimize my interactions with them and keep the ones that do happen short and on-topic. However, I would not call for the removal of the person unless they have violated the shared values of the organization.

Cool. What happens when a bunch of people are doing that to you, including many of the more powerful people? Do you stick around?

What's funny is you're advocating for "Diversity, Inclusion, Equity" values. It's not okay for GNU to be exclusionary of non-Christians, but it's okay for GNU to be exclusionary of women.

>> instead you get people passing names and lists of names around on the quiet, people you don't want to be left alone in a room with, lists of people you don't want to be in the same room as even if not alone, etc.

>I don't think conflating RMS with the people who are on the "might rape you" list is productive.

Do you want to be left alone in a room with "difficult people"? If you knew there were people in a group who would take every opportunity to ask you about "your personal relationship with Christ", especially if left alone with you, and you knew the group as a whole didn't care, would you not share their name with others who might get harassed by them?