removing toxic emailers

[Thomas Rodgers]

On 2021-04-18 23:29, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Apr 2021, 02:41 Frosku, wrote:
> 
> On Sun Apr 18, 2021 at 9:22 PM BST, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote: 
> That's why it's best to dissent politely, lest they incorrectly 
> conclude
> their opinions are consensual, or majoritary, just because they've
> driven dissenters into silence.
> The problem is, Alex, that the trolls mostly haven't been on the 
> dissenting
> side. All of the childish namecalling -- "jerks", "trolls", "crazies" 
> --
> and the insinuations that our voices aren't worth listening to because 
> we
> don't get paid $250,000 a year by Google to contribute to GCC all day 
> are
> coming from the pro-forking side.

Google doesn't pay anybody to work on GCC all day. You know nothing 
about
GCC or the "problems" you're complaining about. Your input to this
conversation is not constructive.

> Once upon a time, free software developers understood that users' 
> opinions
> were as valid as contributor's opinions.

That depends on the user.

Once upon a time, free software's developers *were* it's primary users, 
i.e. they built the technology for themselves and made it freely 
available in the hope that it would be useful to others. It's also the 
case that the vast majority of GCC *current* users are not here making 
proclamations about what GCC's project governance should be. Rather it's 
a vocal and vanishingly small minority, who have contributed nothing of 
value, code or insights, and continue to vocally do so. Many of GCC's 
users are, however, watching in horror at the absolutely amateurish way 
in which this is playing out and wondering if their long term commitment 
should be to using this piece of software to build their 
products/businesses.