> You get to decide how much time is enough to exonerate someone of all accusations i.e. 1 week Not at all. Again, something I didn't say or imply. Please make

> You get to decide how much time is enough to exonerate someone of all accusations i.e. 1 week Not at all. Again, something I didn't say or imply. Please make an effort to read what I write, not what you think I wrote (e.g. "That's a long time", empatically not: "That's enough time"). If something substantial comes up at a later time, I will make sure to critically read it. > You say that other accusations are "too old" I said that one specific accusation is probably too old to retrieve the exact words and circumstances, and as such can be considered unsubstantiated. > this is precisely why victims are afraid to come forward in every such case. What case(s) are you referring to? To put it differently: what, exactly, do you think Stallman is "getting away" with here? And why do you think he's getting away with it? > No one takes them seriously and in fact vilifies them more than the alleged perpetrator. That is of course very regrettable, but again, how does Stallman fit in here? You can't just take a person you obviously dislike, ascribe various characteristics and motivations to them, and then rile against that. > Have fun being a "Knight of RMS", defend him on his most egregious qualities. I'm not having "fun", and I don't see why you would assume that. I find the whole situation very regrettable.