4 ms·

I'm normally 100% on board with condemning this Malthusian environment that has sprung up in the last couple years, but I don't believe that Richard Stallman is

I'm normally 100% on board with condemning this Malthusian environment that has sprung up in the last couple years, but I don't believe that Richard Stallman is a complete victim in this scenario. He has a long history of using forums meant for technology discussion to promote borderline (and that's generous) social opinions, and of being openly hostile to people who don't tow his line. In this instance he ridiculously downplayed the most egregious instances of sex trafficking of minors, by a horridly evil individual... who happened to donate almost a million dollars to him! His previous comments about minors on his personal blog, which I don't even want to dignify with a description (you can do your own search), leads me to wonder what other connections than money he had with Epstein. For all of us that don't worship Stallman - I consider him a net negative to the FOSS movement - this has been a long time coming. It would have been a deserved resignation in a normal social environment.

kstenerud 7y ago
"His previous comments about minors on his personal blog, which I don't even want to dignify with a description (you can do your own search), leads me to wonder what other connections than money he had with Epstein." Speculation, which would not be allowed in a court of law, is unfortunately a perfectly acceptable character assassination methodology. And this kind of tar-and-feathering is precisely why we need official processes for this sort of thing. Official reprimands leading to termination if unfixed, like all civilized peoples do. This ensures that it's made crystal clear what's acceptable and what's not, with time to mend one's ways. The alternative is arbitrary terminations, which makes everyone insecure.
- 5trokerac3 7y ago
  > Speculation, which would not be allowed in a court of law, is unfortunately a perfectly acceptable character assassination methodology. A dude openly defending pedos and CP, who happened to be paid from the coffers of the worst known child trafficker in history - who probably was a honeypot for getting blackmail material on famous and rich people - warrants a very large raising of the eyebrow. Stallman isn't some guy who happened to go to a single party hosted by Epstein. He worked for an org that took a ton of money from him and openly defended all the worst of Epstein's behavior. Anyone who would do that - even without the money - is wholly worth that type of scrutiny. I'm so tired of people defending someone who has been an openly hostile individual for over 30 years. This went well beyond the spectrum or social awkwardness a long time ago.
- kilo_bravo_3 7y ago
  >Speculation, which would not be allowed in a court of law, is unfortunately a perfectly acceptable character assassination methodology. Why are so many people obsessed with applying the same standards used in a court to real life? If someone is a jerk, I don't have to maintain a chain-of-custody for the evidence I use to determine that person is a jerk, and I don't have to have sworn testimony from reliable witnesses to apply the jerk label, and I certainly don't need the opinions of a jury of said jerk's peers. Here's a job-keeping pro-tip, free of charge, for everyone: Especially if you are a public figure, don't talk about child sex trafficking unless it is to criticize it or else you may be fired.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
    Because mobs are horrific and that's what you get when people base punishments on speculation. > Especially if you are a public figure, don't talk about child sex trafficking unless it is to criticize it or else you may be fired. Great. That's the kind of society I want to live in, one where I can't say anything for fear of a mob lynching me.
    - urbanjunkie 7y ago
      Feel free to not live in this society. You won't be missed.
    - kilo_bravo_3 7y ago
      >That's the kind of society I want to live in, one where I can't say anything for fear of a mob lynching me. I'm sure that's hyperbole because comparing being asked (I assume) to resign after downplaying child sex trafficking is not functionally or morally equivalent to lynching. As far as watching what you say, that is the world: 1. As it has always existed. 2. It exists today. 3. Will always exist until the end of time itself. And that will never, ever, change. Don't conflate raging anonymously online with being able to say whatever you want in public.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
- DanBC 7y ago
  > Speculation, which would not be allowed in a court of law, Prosecution: "We think he knew this person was subject to coercion and we say this because X, Y, Z". Defence: "We think he did not know this person was subject to coercion and we say this because we interpret X, Y, and Z differently." These involve speculation about the mental state of the accused.
dangerface 7y ago
> who happened to donate almost a million dollars to him! Is there any evidence of this? There is a big difference between the place he works at taking money and him taking money. I don't think its right to hold an employee responsible for their employers actions.
SkyBelow 7y ago
>He has a long history of using forums meant for technology discussion to promote borderline (and that's generous) social opinions, How often does he bring it up and how often is it in response to someone else saying something that is technically wrong?

kstenerud 7y ago

"His previous comments about minors on his personal blog, which I don't even want to dignify with a description (you can do your own search), leads me to wonder what other connections than money he had with Epstein." Speculation, which would not be allowed in a court of law, is unfortunately a perfectly acceptable character assassination methodology. And this kind of tar-and-feathering is precisely why we need official processes for this sort of thing. Official reprimands leading to termination if unfixed, like all civilized peoples do. This ensures that it's made crystal clear what's acceptable and what's not, with time to mend one's ways. The alternative is arbitrary terminations, which makes everyone insecure.

5trokerac3 7y ago
> Speculation, which would not be allowed in a court of law, is unfortunately a perfectly acceptable character assassination methodology. A dude openly defending pedos and CP, who happened to be paid from the coffers of the worst known child trafficker in history - who probably was a honeypot for getting blackmail material on famous and rich people - warrants a very large raising of the eyebrow. Stallman isn't some guy who happened to go to a single party hosted by Epstein. He worked for an org that took a ton of money from him and openly defended all the worst of Epstein's behavior. Anyone who would do that - even without the money - is wholly worth that type of scrutiny. I'm so tired of people defending someone who has been an openly hostile individual for over 30 years. This went well beyond the spectrum or social awkwardness a long time ago.
kilo_bravo_3 7y ago
>Speculation, which would not be allowed in a court of law, is unfortunately a perfectly acceptable character assassination methodology. Why are so many people obsessed with applying the same standards used in a court to real life? If someone is a jerk, I don't have to maintain a chain-of-custody for the evidence I use to determine that person is a jerk, and I don't have to have sworn testimony from reliable witnesses to apply the jerk label, and I certainly don't need the opinions of a jury of said jerk's peers. Here's a job-keeping pro-tip, free of charge, for everyone: Especially if you are a public figure, don't talk about child sex trafficking unless it is to criticize it or else you may be fired.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
  Because mobs are horrific and that's what you get when people base punishments on speculation. > Especially if you are a public figure, don't talk about child sex trafficking unless it is to criticize it or else you may be fired. Great. That's the kind of society I want to live in, one where I can't say anything for fear of a mob lynching me.
  - urbanjunkie 7y ago
    Feel free to not live in this society. You won't be missed.
  - kilo_bravo_3 7y ago
    >That's the kind of society I want to live in, one where I can't say anything for fear of a mob lynching me. I'm sure that's hyperbole because comparing being asked (I assume) to resign after downplaying child sex trafficking is not functionally or morally equivalent to lynching. As far as watching what you say, that is the world: 1. As it has always existed. 2. It exists today. 3. Will always exist until the end of time itself. And that will never, ever, change. Don't conflate raging anonymously online with being able to say whatever you want in public.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
DanBC 7y ago
> Speculation, which would not be allowed in a court of law, Prosecution: "We think he knew this person was subject to coercion and we say this because X, Y, Z". Defence: "We think he did not know this person was subject to coercion and we say this because we interpret X, Y, and Z differently." These involve speculation about the mental state of the accused.

dangerface 7y ago

> who happened to donate almost a million dollars to him! Is there any evidence of this? There is a big difference between the place he works at taking money and him taking money. I don't think its right to hold an employee responsible for their employers actions.

SkyBelow 7y ago

>He has a long history of using forums meant for technology discussion to promote borderline (and that's generous) social opinions, How often does he bring it up and how often is it in response to someone else saying something that is technically wrong?