The 1st reason behind these attack is to replace him with someone who can be easily controlled. Ask yourself a hundred times if you really want to replace someone who has odd ideas or is unlikable to some, with someone else who would destroy in a short time the work thousands developers did in decades.
Second, organizations like Conservancy, EFF, FSFE, and many others don't seem to have any difficulty finding good public speakers.
The idea that we have to choose between RMS and some corporate drone is a false dichotomy plain an simple.
Well, I don't qualify as a developer, but if I was one I would badly want a good leader. When projects grow, be it in distance, time and number of people, you need good leaders (leaders, not dictators, although sometimes we would have some use for them as well). Broadly speaking a leader is someone who prevents UI wars before they happen, someone who will give the best common base to develop different audio servers without having them stomp on each others feet, someone who will prevent useful but not fun parts of a system to rot because all developers want to work on other parts that are more fun, etc. And with regards to the FSF, being a leader means also acting as the worst possible enemy of any entity wanting to violate open licenses by taking open code, closing it and make loads of money from it giving nothing in return, something RMS has been really good at, including teaching about the problem in very small conferences lots of spokespersons wouldn't accept to talk at. It's a shitty job that brings both friends and enemies, with the enemies being often among the most powerful, not something to be regarded as a prize. Being just a spokesperson, and technically speaking RMS is a good one, isn't enough anymore, IMO.
"The idea that we have to choose between RMS and some corporate drone is a false dichotomy plain an simple."
In a perfect world I would agree; RMS would step down to be replaced by the best possible candidate, and everyone is happy, case closed. Unfortunately smear campaigns orchestrated with the intent of removing someone from a seat, ready to be occupied by some "friend" aren't new. The way this is going seems to suggest that someone, somewhere, is ready to replace him with someone who would work against the Free Software community interests.
Also, if you do not feel represented by an organisation, why not do the OpenSource-thing and fork the organisation?
As of right now, the FSF Europe is no longer joined with the FSF
That's some cheeky phrasing.
> FLOSS is permanently under attack, from the industry
Sure it is, and having a spokeperson that act very poorly in public does not help a bit.
> from the legal framework
Huh?
> NOT going with the flow is exactly what us other people expect RMS to do.
What is "the flow"? Doing very weird things in public? Hitting hard on women at conferences? Pleasing corporations?
> why not do the OpenSource-thing and fork the organisation?
We did: Conservancy, EFF, FSFE are thriving. (Why are you assuming we didn't?)
I’m sure to a sick mind sexually harassing others feels convenient at the time, so apparently he is not that good at restraining himself...
For the first two perhaps there is an org that better aligns with your goals. Unless you are heavily invested into the FSF and wish to change its direction I think putting your energy into an org that aligns with you is a better way to spend your time.
If its the last one please explain to me how that isn't racist/sexist.