Companies will continue to support abusers, like Linus, as long as it's profitable for them.
-
Show this thread
-
Many companies donated to the
@linuxfoundation and chose to pay Linus's salary. Unlike a 501(c)(3), it's a 501(c)(6), which allows members to direct how their contributions are used.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
Each company listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Foundation#Members … could have said, no we don't want our contributes used to pay an abuser, but companies like
@IBM,@Google,@Microsoft,@Cisco, and@intel all continued to contribute and paid Linus to abuse people.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
I challenge each contributor to the
@linuxfoundation to pledge to pull funding if they pay any person that is abusive. When Linus comes back, or any other person they pay money to.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @encthenet @linuxfoundation
I appreciate the sentiment and think each should contribute as required by their conscience. But, what if we find out that not paying abusers is a major productivity hit?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mdhardeman @linuxfoundation
I'm fine with that. If you think one abuser is worth 50 or 100 contributors then I won't be apart of it and won't help out either. I'd much rather go to a community that didn't support/prop up abusers, let alone serial and damn proud of it abusers like Linus.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @encthenet @linuxfoundation
That's fair. I don't support this. I merely note that leadership of some of the world's most successful large software projects seem to have often fit into this pattern. I find that interesting and wish I understood more of the causes and effects.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Also, I've never been involved with Linux, so my experience in other communities, out side of #FreeBSD is minimal.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.