8 ms·

I don’t think that’s fair to those who had a problem with RMS. Him arguing about peodophilia on a mailing list does nothing at all to help his ideas spread. It

I don’t think that’s fair to those who had a problem with RMS. Him arguing about peodophilia on a mailing list does nothing at all to help his ideas spread. It takes quite a lot away in fact. What was the purpose of his argument? To defend his friend Minsky? Again, that does nothing to promote free software, it only adds unneeded and negative baggage. That’s bad leadership and bad for RMS’ message. Yes he had great ideas. They were so great that they exist beyond the man who created them and now benefit from him not being involved.

jnwatson 7y ago
So just because he happens to be the president of an organization means he can’t defend his colleague on an unrelated private message board? The chilling effect of such a policy essentially means that all advocacy groups must be led by slick marketing politicians, always on-point and on-brand, even if off camera.
- zorpner 7y ago
  This is a clear slippery slope fallacy. In this particular instance, all they had to do was not defend pedophiles, blame victims, and repeatedly engage in misogynistic behavior which literally drove women out of their discipline for decades.
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago
  "an unrelated private message board?" Was this an unrelated private message board? I was under the impression it was on a mailing list at MIT.
  - ryeights 7y ago
    The list is semi-private, CSAIL-affiliated students and faculty only
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
      So not a private message board?
- malvosenior 7y ago
  If he’s defending his colleague having sex with a 17 year old who had been trafficked for sex since she was 15, then yes I don’t think any president of an organization should do that.
  - wander_homer 7y ago
    His entire argument was that it was possible that he had no idea that she was a trafficking victim when she approached him, it could have been a regular prostitute from his point of view. However Stallman didn't downplay the harm that's been done to the girl and he didn't rule out the possibility that his friend indeed knew about all of that.
  - craigsmansion 7y ago
    > If he’s defending That's a big "if" Stallman was reviled not for things he didn't do, but for thoughts he didn't think.
    - flatb 7y ago
      Stallman was reviled because he has been accused, by several independent parties, of, among other things: -Asking female coworkers to lay down topless on a mattress in his office. -Threatening a colleague to kill himself if he/she didn't go on a date with him. -Posting up signs in his workplace along the lines of "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)".
      - craigsmansion 7y ago
        > Asking female coworkers to lay down topless on a mattress in his office. Even the initial accusation doesn't try to push the story that far: "He literally used to have a mattress on the floor of his office. [..] (the mattress was also known to have shirtless people lounging on it…)" Person has sleeping accommodation in place where he lives (odd thought it may be). Sometimes people use it as chair. No mentions of requests or toplessness. > -Threatening a colleague to kill himself if he/she didn't go on a date with him. Unsubstantiated: saying something like "I can't imagine life without you" can be interpreted just like that depending on a variety of circumstances. That was also decades ago. > Posting up signs in his workplace along the lines of "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)". Really now? Incidentally also the only one of your accusations of which there is evidence instead of hearsay or urban legends. Furthermore, "a sign" not "signs".
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- mav3rick 7y ago
  Having a leadership position comes with its own checks and balances. RMS isn't special to go over that.
zaphirplane 7y ago
you are wording the sentences to create a vague wrong impression Of what transpired Be specific about what he said that you find abhorrent This topic is uncomfortable and a lot of people stay out of it or strongly self censor. he didn’t.
- malvosenior 7y ago
  > This topic is uncomfortable and a lot of people stay out of it or strongly self censor. he didn’t. This is my point. As the president of an organization it’s not your job to make people uncomfortable about things that have nothing to do with that organization’s goals. Debating what is and is not statutory rape is not a discussion that should take place in any professional or technical environment. This instance is actually even worse than just debating something in the inappropriate context. Epstein is a huge scandal. He raped dozens if not hundreds of girls. He loaned them out to other powerful people. It is within this context that RMS’ statements are most damning. He’s wading in some very murky ethical waters and it should be no surprise he caught a backlash.
  - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
    > As the president of an organization it’s not your job to make people uncomfortable about things that have nothing to do with that organization’s goals. Did anyone claim it was his job? > Debating what is and is not statutory rape is not a discussion that should take place in any professional or technical environment. Why? > This instance is actually even worse than just debating something in the inappropriate context. Epstein is a huge scandal. He raped dozens if not hundreds of girls. He loaned them out to other powerful people. It is within this context that RMS’ statements are most damning. Why is that? Does the fact that someone commits a crime make it inappropriate to defend people associated with them against incorrect accusations? How do you square that with the rule of law? > He’s wading in some very murky ethical waters and it should be no surprise he caught a backlash. He also should not be surprised that he gets a lot of opposition for promoting free software ... so, supposedly, he should not promote free software either?
  - zaphirplane 7y ago

jnwatson 7y ago

So just because he happens to be the president of an organization means he can’t defend his colleague on an unrelated private message board? The chilling effect of such a policy essentially means that all advocacy groups must be led by slick marketing politicians, always on-point and on-brand, even if off camera.

zorpner 7y ago
This is a clear slippery slope fallacy. In this particular instance, all they had to do was not defend pedophiles, blame victims, and repeatedly engage in misogynistic behavior which literally drove women out of their discipline for decades.
SolaceQuantum 7y ago
"an unrelated private message board?" Was this an unrelated private message board? I was under the impression it was on a mailing list at MIT.
- ryeights 7y ago
  The list is semi-private, CSAIL-affiliated students and faculty only
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
    So not a private message board?
malvosenior 7y ago
If he’s defending his colleague having sex with a 17 year old who had been trafficked for sex since she was 15, then yes I don’t think any president of an organization should do that.
- wander_homer 7y ago
  His entire argument was that it was possible that he had no idea that she was a trafficking victim when she approached him, it could have been a regular prostitute from his point of view. However Stallman didn't downplay the harm that's been done to the girl and he didn't rule out the possibility that his friend indeed knew about all of that.
- craigsmansion 7y ago
  > If he’s defending That's a big "if" Stallman was reviled not for things he didn't do, but for thoughts he didn't think.
  - flatb 7y ago
    Stallman was reviled because he has been accused, by several independent parties, of, among other things: -Asking female coworkers to lay down topless on a mattress in his office. -Threatening a colleague to kill himself if he/she didn't go on a date with him. -Posting up signs in his workplace along the lines of "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)".
    - craigsmansion 7y ago
      > Asking female coworkers to lay down topless on a mattress in his office. Even the initial accusation doesn't try to push the story that far: "He literally used to have a mattress on the floor of his office. [..] (the mattress was also known to have shirtless people lounging on it…)" Person has sleeping accommodation in place where he lives (odd thought it may be). Sometimes people use it as chair. No mentions of requests or toplessness. > -Threatening a colleague to kill himself if he/she didn't go on a date with him. Unsubstantiated: saying something like "I can't imagine life without you" can be interpreted just like that depending on a variety of circumstances. That was also decades ago. > Posting up signs in his workplace along the lines of "Knight for Justice (Also: Hot Ladies)". Really now? Incidentally also the only one of your accusations of which there is evidence instead of hearsay or urban legends. Furthermore, "a sign" not "signs".
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
mav3rick 7y ago
Having a leadership position comes with its own checks and balances. RMS isn't special to go over that.

zaphirplane 7y ago

you are wording the sentences to create a vague wrong impression Of what transpired Be specific about what he said that you find abhorrent This topic is uncomfortable and a lot of people stay out of it or strongly self censor. he didn’t.

malvosenior 7y ago
> This topic is uncomfortable and a lot of people stay out of it or strongly self censor. he didn’t. This is my point. As the president of an organization it’s not your job to make people uncomfortable about things that have nothing to do with that organization’s goals. Debating what is and is not statutory rape is not a discussion that should take place in any professional or technical environment. This instance is actually even worse than just debating something in the inappropriate context. Epstein is a huge scandal. He raped dozens if not hundreds of girls. He loaned them out to other powerful people. It is within this context that RMS’ statements are most damning. He’s wading in some very murky ethical waters and it should be no surprise he caught a backlash.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 7y ago
  > As the president of an organization it’s not your job to make people uncomfortable about things that have nothing to do with that organization’s goals. Did anyone claim it was his job? > Debating what is and is not statutory rape is not a discussion that should take place in any professional or technical environment. Why? > This instance is actually even worse than just debating something in the inappropriate context. Epstein is a huge scandal. He raped dozens if not hundreds of girls. He loaned them out to other powerful people. It is within this context that RMS’ statements are most damning. Why is that? Does the fact that someone commits a crime make it inappropriate to defend people associated with them against incorrect accusations? How do you square that with the rule of law? > He’s wading in some very murky ethical waters and it should be no surprise he caught a backlash. He also should not be surprised that he gets a lot of opposition for promoting free software ... so, supposedly, he should not promote free software either?
- zaphirplane 7y ago