3 ms·

> RMS did not describe the trafficked child as "willing". He said she presented herself to Minsky as willing... That unbelievably loose semantics, especially c

> RMS did not describe the trafficked child as "willing". He said she presented herself to Minsky as willing... That unbelievably loose semantics, especially considering this wasn't some random streetwalker at a bar. They were on an billionaire's island with a f'ing sex temple, for god's sake. And, I'll reiterate, this was a child being offered to a 74 year old man. What I will concede is that RMS is the first person I wouldn't expect to understand any of the unspoken obviousnesses of the situation, such as being able to deduce, in the moment, why a child prostitute would be presenting herself as willing. Regardless, that doesn't cover how he used it at the time to excuse Minsky allegedly sleeping with her, because this supposed witness wasn't openly known. "He may have thought the child was willing" is about the most disgusting excuse imaginable. But what upsets me most is that people jump to the defense of a 66 year man that does this, as if he shouldn't have learned by now how not to act like this, even with impairments. He has been allowed to be this way, because his horrid behavior is always defended by his fans.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
You know what upsets me the most? That you're still not reading. > RMS is the first person I wouldn't expect to understand any of the unspoken obviousnesses of the situation, such as being able to deduce, in the moment, why a child prostitute would be presenting herself as willing RMS did precisely that - showed the understanding by assuming the child was coerced. You seem to be actually arguing here that she was willing. > Regardless, that doesn't cover how he used it at the time to excuse Minsky allegedly sleeping with her, because this supposed witness wasn't openly known. He didn't excuse him. On the contrary, he assumed the accusations were true. Let me quote his own words: > The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein’s harem. (See https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed. https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jef...) Let’s presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). He did not defend Minsky from accusation of having sex with a minor. He only wanted to make sure the accusation doesn't get inflated in public perception from "had sex" to "applied violence to have sex". That's literally all he wanted. Whether or not that was needlessly pedantic or inappropriate at the moment, it is strictly not true that he defended Minsky against accusation of sex. Let me reiterate, even though RMS was as clear as humanly possible here - he was not defending the act of sleeping with that woman, he was only trying to stop the alleged sex being inflated into accusations of physical violence. > people jump to the defense of a 66 year man that does this, as if he shouldn't have learned by now how not to act like this, even with impairments You're assuming a lot. How about, people jumping to the defense of a person who has been subject of an Internet which hunt based on purposeful misinterpretation, later turned into explicit lies in the media headlines? Some people do not like RMS, but hate lies more.
- 5trokerac3 7y ago
  > That you're still not reading. Projection. Read that paragraph you quoted, specifically the words "in the moment". Nobody is arguing that Stallman didn't deduce she might have been coerced. His whole excuse is that Minsky wouldn't have been able to tell that in the moment, even though he was on f'ing sex trafficking island. That a 17 year old offering to sleep with a 74 year old man on a billionaire's sex island was a victim of trafficking is not something that takes any bit of thoughtful reflection to figure out! It can be done in the moment by anyone with a conscience. > He didn't excuse him. Yes he did. "The 74 year old man might have thought the 17 year old on sex trafficking island was willing" is an excuse of the most disgusting type. Now you're making excuses for the excuser. > Some people do not like RMS, but hate lies more. You have proven no lies in my bulleted list.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > His whole excuse is that Minsky wouldn't have been able to tell that in the moment, even though he was on f'ing sex trafficking island. Did he know, in that moment, he was on a sex trafficking island? > That a 17 year old offering to sleep with a 74 year old man on a billionaire's sex island was a victim of trafficking is not something that takes any bit of thoughtful reflection to figure out! Well, apparently Minsky may have figured that out, given that the witness testimony is that he turned the offer down. Regardless, this is off topic anyway. What's on topic is that RMS did not excuse the accusations of sex, only the accusations of violence which the original accusations (to his impression) risked turning into. > Now you're making excuses for the excuser. No, I'm only repeatedly restating what RMS said in different forms in a vain hope that one of these restatements "clicks" with you. > You have proven no lies in my bulleted list. I believe I did prove one (note that I didn't accuse you of making it, just repeating it). You know, this thread and the whole RMS story does make me worried about future of humanity. Great many people in the industry have revealed themselves to have no ability to read with comprehension, or parse clear English sentences. Now I see why people can't even agree about most basic facts in scientific issues like global warming - they read one thing, but in their minds, they read a different thing. I have nothing more to add on this topic.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

You know what upsets me the most? That you're still not reading. > RMS is the first person I wouldn't expect to understand any of the unspoken obviousnesses of the situation, such as being able to deduce, in the moment, why a child prostitute would be presenting herself as willing RMS did precisely that - showed the understanding by assuming the child was coerced. You seem to be actually arguing here that she was willing. > Regardless, that doesn't cover how he used it at the time to excuse Minsky allegedly sleeping with her, because this supposed witness wasn't openly known. He didn't excuse him. On the contrary, he assumed the accusations were true. Let me quote his own words: > The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein’s harem. (See https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed. https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jef...) Let’s presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it). He did not defend Minsky from accusation of having sex with a minor. He only wanted to make sure the accusation doesn't get inflated in public perception from "had sex" to "applied violence to have sex". That's literally all he wanted. Whether or not that was needlessly pedantic or inappropriate at the moment, it is strictly not true that he defended Minsky against accusation of sex. Let me reiterate, even though RMS was as clear as humanly possible here - he was not defending the act of sleeping with that woman, he was only trying to stop the alleged sex being inflated into accusations of physical violence. > people jump to the defense of a 66 year man that does this, as if he shouldn't have learned by now how not to act like this, even with impairments You're assuming a lot. How about, people jumping to the defense of a person who has been subject of an Internet which hunt based on purposeful misinterpretation, later turned into explicit lies in the media headlines? Some people do not like RMS, but hate lies more.

5trokerac3 7y ago
> That you're still not reading. Projection. Read that paragraph you quoted, specifically the words "in the moment". Nobody is arguing that Stallman didn't deduce she might have been coerced. His whole excuse is that Minsky wouldn't have been able to tell that in the moment, even though he was on f'ing sex trafficking island. That a 17 year old offering to sleep with a 74 year old man on a billionaire's sex island was a victim of trafficking is not something that takes any bit of thoughtful reflection to figure out! It can be done in the moment by anyone with a conscience. > He didn't excuse him. Yes he did. "The 74 year old man might have thought the 17 year old on sex trafficking island was willing" is an excuse of the most disgusting type. Now you're making excuses for the excuser. > Some people do not like RMS, but hate lies more. You have proven no lies in my bulleted list.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > His whole excuse is that Minsky wouldn't have been able to tell that in the moment, even though he was on f'ing sex trafficking island. Did he know, in that moment, he was on a sex trafficking island? > That a 17 year old offering to sleep with a 74 year old man on a billionaire's sex island was a victim of trafficking is not something that takes any bit of thoughtful reflection to figure out! Well, apparently Minsky may have figured that out, given that the witness testimony is that he turned the offer down. Regardless, this is off topic anyway. What's on topic is that RMS did not excuse the accusations of sex, only the accusations of violence which the original accusations (to his impression) risked turning into. > Now you're making excuses for the excuser. No, I'm only repeatedly restating what RMS said in different forms in a vain hope that one of these restatements "clicks" with you. > You have proven no lies in my bulleted list. I believe I did prove one (note that I didn't accuse you of making it, just repeating it). You know, this thread and the whole RMS story does make me worried about future of humanity. Great many people in the industry have revealed themselves to have no ability to read with comprehension, or parse clear English sentences. Now I see why people can't even agree about most basic facts in scientific issues like global warming - they read one thing, but in their minds, they read a different thing. I have nothing more to add on this topic.