everything wrong with free software

 "obedience breeds foolishness"

### the-trouble-with-techrights other pages: => dividing-things-pointlessly-and-inaccurately-along-age-lines.html dividing-things-pointlessly-and-inaccurately-along-age-lines *originally posted:* jan 2022 i probably wont be responding to as many individual techrights articles this year, because the licensing on too many new articles is ambiguous. this only applies to roys articles, not guests-- though my complaints are typically not about guest articles. it technically only applies to "articles" with videos included, but at least in january that seems to be a lot of the new articles (not including the epo stuff which i tend to mostly ignore-- i simply dont need that level of detail about european patent stuff, its probably of value to someone). perhaps that is an opportunity to better organise my years worth of material about it. its been a year since i left, and 9 or 10 months since roy pretended i was back. i wrote for techrights for two years (as a guest, like virtually everyone except roy does) but the term "guest" is misleading. roy had me help with a a number of tasks that took many hours, on many occasions-- in more reasonable terms i was a volunteer, not a "guest". but then after two years of helping and being thanked, i left and was rewarded with a campaign of petty smears and lies lasting for months. i think a watch is more traditional (not for volunteers, but still). i tried to resolve this peacefully. roy continued his campaign of bullshit unabated by any sort of appeal to honesty, reason, ethics or fairness. if someone asks "do you think hes a dick?" the answer is "no, dicks are very common." if you sorted the history of douchebags in open source, and there is a lot of competition in that category-- id put him in the top ten. he even did an article in the past few months saying that techrights is about free software, not open source-- thats a flat out lie on top of his undisclosed professional connections to open source, red hat and canonical. yes, he does write things that are critical of those companies-- its called controlling the narrative. roys audience ACTUALLY gives a shit about these problems, and techrights pretends to while downplaying them over and over again-- my favourite was when he thought "boycott novell" (the original name of the website, because it was oroginally about-- you guessed it-- a boycott bruce perens called against novell) was "too negative" for a name. i mean it is harder to downplay a boycott i guess, when you dont have a more ambiguous title to work with. ### anything that paints a picture (good or bad) but eschews real action seems to be considered fair play-- techrights does both. it even pretends to care about facts. the whole experience has been educational, and is truly representative of everything "open source" (not to be confused with free software) stands for-- abuse, exploitation, lies, co-opting and petty bullshit. these are the true "values" of open source. i feel sorry for anyone who uses the term to mean something else-- many of those people are mistaken. only some are deliberately lying. these days, free software is truly under occupation by open source, and it comes with all the same corporate sellout baggage. this is not what free software stands for at all, but like vichy france-- oh, go fuck yourself mike godwin. luckily we have techrights to pretend that things are alright, or to admit that things are NOT alright and then to backpedal, downplay and ride the fence over issue after issue, year after year. ### ive written that techrights is an open source scam, but NOT a cult-- the question is not whether there is useful information there (there sometimes is) but whether its presented in a way that is honest and not misleading. many articles are bite-size and appear standalone. together, they weave a tapestry of misdirection, if-by-whisky and "OH NO! WAIT, EVERYTHING IS OK". theres really something for everybody there, because when you average it out techrights doesnt have a message at all. even contributing will lead to more articles on the same topics that cancel out what youve said. even that might be okay, if the process was honest and not sleazy. theres a similar process that happens when you deal with the mainstream media-- they have to cover crises for ratings, but they cant have people getting worked up and actually DOING anything about what they learn, so they have to "manage" every topic as though its neatly resolved in 30 minutes like some kind of pointless sitcom. ### you arent contributing what you think you are; youre lending credibility to something that constantly manipulates readers (and other contributors) in a most dishonest fashion. this is how techrights addresses the (terrible) state of free software-- admit the truth (sort of), then build a tower of bullshit on top of it. getting stabbed in the back is the sort of thing that pisses off normal people. ive never met a normal person, but i stand by this generalisation. i think its a safe bet that i was more pissed off when this happened initially-- but the betrayal has never really stopped, the bullshit really is what techrights is all about, and when i left open source more than a decade ago after realising it was a bunch of lies (all the more awful that free software is turning into open source for reasons that should be easy enough to guess) ive spent every year since then warning people about what a cloying, narcissistic bait-and-switch scam it really is. bait-and-switch is what you get from techrights, too: the problems are bait-- but WAIT! everythings fine now, because of techrights. its important to note once again, techrights isnt a cult-- not for lack of trying. the people that stay dont seem hooked on the "truth" techrights peddles at all. the people that leave dont seem to be either. if i said (incorrectly) that it was a cult, you would get the wrong idea about everybody that draws near to it, or even the ones that stay. im not interested in that, the only information about techrights thats useful to me (to have, to share) is information thats as accurate as i can get. so if techrights isnt a cult, what is it? techrights is a treadmill. its spin-- and if you want to know what roy is really a doctor of, theres your answer to that too. ### it actually started in august 2020, not december. ``` schestowitz MinceR: I want to set the record straight 15:46 schestowitz figosdev got very upset about something you said about this chemical schestowitz everything that happened afterwards seems connected to this 15:47 ``` https://techrights.org/irc-archives/irc-log-techrights-081121.html hes either a liar or an idiot. the exchange hes referring to between mincer and myself (from a year before, specifically december 2020) was inconsequential, which i explained to roy the very same week but he leaves this out and constructs a new narrative (an entire campaign around this single irc conversation) instead. roy himself made a public log of the private email where i explained this, all he has to do is GREP to find the truth about it. he knows anyway, hes just lying to mincer like hes lied to me, to richard stallman and to everybody else. more to the point, i wrote an article (http://techrights.org/2020/08/21/last-article/) months prior to that december (august 2020) saying i was LEAVING techrights because id been misrepresented. that gets left out of this narrative even as he "wants to set the record straight." nothing about any "chemical" (hes referring to monosodium glutamate) in that article, just concerns about roys treatment of contributors. it seems like if he wanted to set the record straight, he could actually comment factually on these things. but thats not what spin doctors do-- they start with facts, then they build from there. bait with facts, and switch to bullshit-- just like open source does. then pretend you care about freedom-- if open source didnt pretend to care SOMETIMES, people would just walk away. heres a tip, open source: when they do walk away, dont say it was because they were tired of you routinely bullshitting. say it was because of a single irc exchange, about something entirely unrelated. dont take a look in the mirror, dont try to develop a hint of integrity, and above all, dont tell the truth. you couldnt be open source then-- open source is a scam, and so is techrights. ### im not the only one to get the roy-al treatment. other contributors (ive written about this) have had similar experiences-- roy is simply unaccountable to them. the simplest of concerns will be evaded and remain unfixed and unmitigated. this pattern affects not only people who write for techrights, but it affects most people who read it. most people, naturally, will not care about this statement-- they will also not care when suffient evidence is provided. in fact, most people have a natural instinct (or learned behaviour, but its ingrained just the same) to avoid this sort of thing. my approach to people who have been reasonable about this but otherwise were unimpressed is to be patient and let them make their own decisions. they are still free to ignore the warning-- many people will not be directly affected in a way that matters to them. no matter what techrights does, or fails to do, its a simple fact that most people arent going to be concerned about it-- maybe if he spent months lying to people about them they would take it personally, or maybe they would have to spend 2 years helping him first-- i dont know. i mean, actually-- i know that neither of those are requirements, as they dont apply to other people who have recognised and responded to this. not only is the warning fair-- the warnings have actually done some good. maybe its not enough good to get excited about it, but its some consolation. im sure people would prefer to dismiss this as irc drama, not to see it for the exploitation and dishonesty it really is. thats exactly the narrative that roys lie about irc feeds-- the one that ignores what he was doing all along, and focuses on-- once again-- his own manipulative and self-serving bullshit. this problem is LEAST of all about what happened in irc. the whole big to do about that was a distraction from the issue; and its a distraction that only happened because i stayed a few months following my "last article" after roy lied (yet again) to keep me there longer. but there really is only so much a person can do about this sort of thing. let me tell you, as someone who has done more about it than anyone-- its still true. => https://wrongwithfreesw.neocities.org