Public Shaming, False Accusations, and a Cartoon Tiger: How Four People Tried to Bully Me Over My Email Address

Public Shaming, False Accusations, and a Cartoon Tiger: How Four People Tried to Bully Me Over My Email Address

By Jean Louis
bugs@gnu.support (.support, not .org — still not the FSF)
Published: 2026-04-04

The Short Version

I have used bugs@gnu.support for years as a voluntary service to help people with GNU software bugs. Not once has anyone mistaken me for the FSF. Not once has the FSF complained.

But over the past few days, four people on the GNU Emacs mailing list decided that my email address is “confusing” and took it upon themselves to publicly shame me until I change it.

When I politely declined, they escalated. False accusations. Personal attacks. Gaslighting. And one of them lied publicly, claiming I sent “threatening” private messages — when all I did was ask if he would say these things to my face.

This article is the full story.

The Cast

Name	Email Address	Domain Meaning	Role
Rémi Letot	`hobbes@poukram.net`	Cartoon tiger + personal domain	Chief shamer, false accuser
Tomas	`tomas@tuxteam.de`	Linux penguin + “team” + German domain	Selective concern
Arsen Arsenović	`arsen@aarsen.me`	Personal domain	Respectable cover
Peter Hardy	`peter@hardy.dropbear.id.au`	Australian marsupial? SSH client?	Lazy drive-by

The Facts They Ignore

The FSF owns the GNU trademark. They have never contacted me about bugs@gnu.support. Not once.
Zero people have ever mistaken me for the FSF. In years of using this address, nobody has been confused.
.support is not .org. The domain explicitly says support, not organization.
It is a voluntary service. The address was created for people to send bugs about GNU software. That is what it does.
Four people is not a problem. On a list with thousands of subscribers, statistically insignificant.

The Hypocrisy They Ignore

They demand I add a disclaimer to bugs@gnu.support because it might be “confusing.”

But let us look at their own email addresses:

Rémi Letot emails from hobbes@poukram.net. Hobbes is a cartoon tiger. Poukram is a personal domain of unknown origin. No disclaimer saying he is not Bill Watterson. No disclaimer saying he is not actually a tiger.
Tomas emails from tomas@tuxteam.de. Tux is the Linux penguin mascot. “Team” implies an official group. No disclaimer saying he is not a penguin. No disclaimer saying he is not affiliated with Linux.
Arsen Arsenović emails from arsen@aarsen.me. A personal domain. Fine. No disclaimer needed. But somehow my personal domain is confusing?
Peter Hardy emails from peter@hardy.dropbear.id.au. What is a dropbear? A small Australian marsupial? An SSH client? No disclaimer.

So they demand clarity from me while hiding behind cartoon tigers, penguins, and mysterious marsupials.

The word for this is hypocrisy.

The Public Shaming Campaign

It started with Rémi Letot. On April 2, 2026, he publicly demanded that I add a disclaimer to my email address because he personally found it “confusing” on a GNU Emacs help list.

Here is what he said:

“If you don’t see how bugs@gnu.support can be confusing on a GNU Emacs Help medium… well, I don’t see what I can add… Maybe the fact that several people publicly said so should somehow ring a bell?”

I explained my position. I told him my address was a voluntary service. He did not care.

He doubled down:

“It would be very easy to not use that specific address as your personal address… create a personal or neutral alias… it’s trivial, really.”

He demanded I change my email address. Not because anyone was actually confused. But because he felt it was confusing.

Then Tomas joined in. He said my domain was “surprising” but hobbes was “innocuous.” Funny how that works.

Then Arsen Arsenović gave it a respectable veneer. He invoked Cygnus Support (a company from 30 years ago) and suggested my address “implies an officialdom of sorts.”

Then Peter Hardy piled on with the laziest drive-by of all:

“Please include your disclaimer.”

No argument. No reasoning. Just a demand.

Four people. Publicly shaming me. On a list meant for Emacs discussion.

The False Accusation (Defamation)

After days of this, I finally sent Rémi Letot a private message. Here is the full text:

“Rémi,

You’re annoying now.

Face to face, would you say this? Or only from behind a keyboard, safely anonymous, with no responsibility?“

That is not a threat. That is me telling him he is annoying — because he is. And asking if he has the courage to say these things in person.

He does not.

Instead, he publicly lied:

“Please stop sending slightly threatening private emails. If you don’t feel like writing it publicly, maybe you shouldn’t write it at all.”

He called my message “threatening.”

Let me be clear: there is no threat in that message. No violence. No intimidation. No “I will harm you.” Just a question about accountability.

This is defamation. He knows it is not a threat. He lied anyway to damage my reputation.

The Gaslighting

He also dug through my old posts to find an unrelated criticism I made about the org-mode mailing list — where I said it was “unwelcoming and exhausting.” He then used it against me:

“A few days ago, you described org-mode’s mailing list as being ‘unwelcoming and exhausting.’ Lots of people came forward saying quite the opposite… Here you have a very clear real opportunity to make all mailing lists… more welcoming.”

He twisted my words. He ignored the context. He made himself the victim and me the villain.

This is gaslighting. Pure and simple.

The Hypocrisy of “Welcoming”

He accused me of being unwelcoming. But let us look at his own behavior:

Behavior	Welcoming?
Publicly shaming a volunteer over their email address	No
Demanding they change to suit your preferences	No
Piling on with multiple people to create a mob	No
Making false accusations of “threatening” messages	No
Digging through someone’s post history to attack them	No
Refusing to meet face to face while attacking from a keyboard	No

He is the unwelcoming one. He just cannot see it.

The Irony of “Confusion”

He claims bugs@gnu.support is confusing because it contains the word “gnu.”

But let us examine that claim.

The domain is .support, not .org.
The FSF has never complained.
Zero people have ever mistaken me for the FSF.

If the trademark owner is not confused, and zero users are confused, then who is confused?

Four people. That is who.

Four people on a mailing list with thousands of subscribers.

Statistically insignificant. Practically non-existent.

But they demand I change my behavior anyway.

Who Is Rémi Letot?

He is not anonymous. He runs a company called Lybrafox Technologies sprl in Namur, Belgium.

IP Address: 37.59.240.190
Reverse DNS: mail.poukram.net
Business Address: Boulevard d'Herbatte 111, 5000 Namur, Belgium
Phone: +32 81 66 55 00

This information is public from WHOIS records and his own email signatures going back to 2004.

He has been a member of the free software community for decades. He should know better.

He demanded I add a disclaimer. He has no disclaimer saying he is not Bill Watterson, not a cartoon tiger, not a hybrid animal.

He called my private message “threatening.” He refuses to say these things to my face.

He hides behind his keyboard and his cartoon tiger email address while publicly shaming a volunteer.

The Legal Context

Because Rémi Letot is located in Belgium, Belgian law applies.

Article 442bis of the Belgian Penal Code prohibits harassment that seriously disturbs a person’s peace and tranquility, when the perpetrator knew or should have known this would be the effect.

His repeated public shaming, false accusations, and sustained campaign over multiple days meet this definition.

His false claim that my private message was “threatening” may also constitute defamation under Articles 443-444 of the Belgian Penal Code.

As the owner of a Belgian company ( Lybrafox Technologies sprl), he is held to a higher standard of accountability.

The OVH Abuse Complaint

I have filed a formal abuse complaint with OVH, his hosting provider, at abuse@ovh.net. The complaint includes:

His full name and company information
His IP address (37.59.240.190)
His email address (hobbes@poukram.net)
Full evidence of his harassment and false accusations

OVH now has the opportunity to warn him or terminate his services if he continues.

The Challenge He Refused

I asked him face to face, would you say this? Or only from behind a keyboard?

He refused to answer.

He knows he would not say these things to my face. He knows he hides behind anonymity and distance.

So I will say it here:

Rémi Letot, you are a hypocrite. You publicly shame volunteers while hiding behind a cartoon tiger. You make false accusations of threats when there are none. You refuse to take responsibility for your words.

You are the unwelcoming one. Not me.

What I Will Do

I will continue using bugs@gnu.support to help people with GNU software bugs. Because that is what it is for.

I will not add a disclaimer. I will not change my email address. I will not be bullied into conformity by four people who are confused by a .support domain.

Until then, the Concerned Citizens can remain concerned — from a distance.

What You Can Do

If you are a member of any online community:

Do not tolerate public shaming. If someone is being attacked for a harmless choice, speak up.
Do not pile on. If a thread has become a mob, step away.
Remember that volunteers keep free software alive. Harassing them over email addresses is how you drive them away.
M-x doctor. Sometimes the best response is no response.

Conclusion

Four people. Zero actual confusion. Zero FSF complaints. Years of voluntary bug support.

And somehow, I am the problem.

No.

I am the volunteer. They are the bullies.

I will keep helping people with GNU software. They can keep being confused from behind their keyboards.

M-x ignore.

Jean Louis
bugs@gnu.support (.support, not .org — not the FSF, not a cartoon tiger, not a penguin, not a dropbear)

P.S. — If this article confuses you, please email hobbes@poukram.net for a second opinion. I hear they have a tiger.