4 ms·

> The complaints about stallman aren't a matter of thoughtcrime, they're a matter of entirely inappropriate behavior Who are you exactly to think you can decid

> The complaints about stallman aren't a matter of thoughtcrime, they're a matter of entirely inappropriate behavior Who are you exactly to think you can decide what is - without doubt - "entirely inappropriate behaviour"? are you in charge of the thought police?

SolaceQuantum 7y ago
Sorry, I’m not understanding. Is inappropriate actions a thoughtcrime? Like. I thought thoughtcrime and actions are separate- you can think about how women are just pieces of meat all you like, once you start treating them as pieces of meat then you’ve moved from thinking (thoughtcrime) to action (serial killer)? (Edit; to be clear, since this was a point of confusion, I do not believe anyone I am responding to thinks women are meat! This is a rhetorical tactic to use as an example.)
- lostjohnny 7y ago
  You're not in charge of deciding what's inappropriate or not. Talking about dicks is inappropriate, but if you are an urologist speaking with other urolgy students, it makes perfect sense. Stallman was writing to other students about the correct representation of the Minsky situation, because they were using Minsky's name in an inappropriate way to protest against MIT-Epstein case. (Unless you think that accusing a dead person without proof is alright) His entire life has been devoted to finding the precise combinations of words to express what he wanted to say, in the most exact possible manner. Can you blame him for doing what he did best, among his peers? I blame the weapon builder who felt triggered and accused him of something he did not do. > you can think about how women are just pieces of meat all you like Pathetic... Nobody ever said that. You're embarrassing yourself.
  - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
    Sorry, I should’ve clarified that this is a rhetorical you! My apologies for not being clear; I was under the impression that the structure of my post would’ve implied as such. Sorry for the offense I’ve caused. As for the rest of it- well, the post questioning thoughtcrime wasn’t about the individual email defense of a friend at all, but about the decades of complaints! So, again, totally out of context there. Can you re-respond with relevant conjecture?

SolaceQuantum 7y ago

Sorry, I’m not understanding. Is inappropriate actions a thoughtcrime? Like. I thought thoughtcrime and actions are separate- you can think about how women are just pieces of meat all you like, once you start treating them as pieces of meat then you’ve moved from thinking (thoughtcrime) to action (serial killer)? (Edit; to be clear, since this was a point of confusion, I do not believe anyone I am responding to thinks women are meat! This is a rhetorical tactic to use as an example.)

lostjohnny 7y ago
You're not in charge of deciding what's inappropriate or not. Talking about dicks is inappropriate, but if you are an urologist speaking with other urolgy students, it makes perfect sense. Stallman was writing to other students about the correct representation of the Minsky situation, because they were using Minsky's name in an inappropriate way to protest against MIT-Epstein case. (Unless you think that accusing a dead person without proof is alright) His entire life has been devoted to finding the precise combinations of words to express what he wanted to say, in the most exact possible manner. Can you blame him for doing what he did best, among his peers? I blame the weapon builder who felt triggered and accused him of something he did not do. > you can think about how women are just pieces of meat all you like Pathetic... Nobody ever said that. You're embarrassing yourself.
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago
  Sorry, I should’ve clarified that this is a rhetorical you! My apologies for not being clear; I was under the impression that the structure of my post would’ve implied as such. Sorry for the offense I’ve caused. As for the rest of it- well, the post questioning thoughtcrime wasn’t about the individual email defense of a friend at all, but about the decades of complaints! So, again, totally out of context there. Can you re-respond with relevant conjecture?