RMS resigned, why not Matthias Kirschner too?

Daniel Pocock daniel at pocock.pro
Sat Oct 12 20:16:46 BST 2019


The case for Matthias Kirschner's resignation as FSFE president is more
serious than the case for RMS's resignation.

Does anybody agree that at least one of the points on this list is more
serious than all the false allegations misquoting RMS combined?

If so, should Kirschner resign too?

Here is the charge sheet:

1. the fellowship / supporter financial data vulnerability.
Organizations have on obligation to report breaches but FSFE chose to
hide their issue[1] last year, potentially violating the law.

2. participants were not informed that their email addresses were
available[2] for all other participants to download, some people seemed
surprised at this.

3. the vendetta against the last Fellowship representative, including
two formal attempts to remove the representative within a space of 5
months, does anybody doubt that this confrontational approach was the
trigger for all subsequent animosity, airing of dirty laundry, etc?

4. the botched[3] force-migration of Fellows into the Supporter program.
 Many fellows chose not to renew and total membership and revenue from
the Fellows was reduced.

5. the failure to correctly deal with conflicts of interest, as
reported[4] on the fellowship blog

6. the false, malicious and defamatory claims that German authorities
are making an investigation in the Fellowship representative


Regards,

Daniel


1. https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/pipermail/discussion/2019-May/000088.html
2. https://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/2019-May/012696.html
3. https://fsfellowship.eu/2018/09/08/who-were-the-fsfe-fellowship.html
4. https://fsfellowship.eu/2019/01/26/fsfe-behavior-standards.html



More information about the Discussion mailing list