4 ms·

It seems to have been pretty much public knowledge in the circles that interacted with RMS. It's just that nobody cared enough to act.

passwordreset 7y ago
I have interacted with RMS. He stayed at a friend's house, and I went to one of his lectures. Though I'm not a friend of the man, I know that what you're saying was not true, at least during the time that me and my friends met with him. This type of rumor mongering is hurtful and should be opposed.
- lorenzhs 7y ago
  "He didn't harass women during the two days I interacted with him, therefore he has never done so" is not as strong a defense as you seem to think.
  - KSteffensen 7y ago
    "I heard somebody say he harassed women, so he must have done so" is also not as strong an attack as you seem to think.
  - lostjohnny 7y ago
    > He didn't harass women during the two days I interacted with him, therefore he has never done so Exactly, he's innocent until proven guilty, like everybody else. You're implying that "I heard from someone that heard it from someone else, that heard it from their dad, that read it on a mailing list, 20 years ago, that he did, therefore ho did"
  - bmsleight_ 7y ago
    When did you stop beating your wife ?
lostjohnny 7y ago
> It seems seems does not qualify as evidence > circles that interacted with RMS Like Thomas Lord? https://archive.is/7qepC https://archive.is/7qepC
- jacobush 7y ago
  You don't there is enough mud to go around? MIT can do the Yogi Berra schtick by throwing Stallman out. But if so, it still does not automatically follow that it was the wrong thing to do.
  - lostjohnny 7y ago
    > You don't there is enough mud to go around? I think there is only mud, not based on any real issue with what Stallman said or did. > does not automatically follow that it was the wrong thing to do. It does. FSF main goal was freedom and protecting fundamental liberties of each individual Stallman main contribution to FSF was the GPL, a legal framework, FSF main contribution was pro bono legal support defending free software in court. So, yeah, if FSF cannot defend its founder, most popular and most honorable member, it becomes basically useless, it follows it was the wrong thing to do. Their reputation was based on trust, trust has been broken.

passwordreset 7y ago

I have interacted with RMS. He stayed at a friend's house, and I went to one of his lectures. Though I'm not a friend of the man, I know that what you're saying was not true, at least during the time that me and my friends met with him. This type of rumor mongering is hurtful and should be opposed.

lorenzhs 7y ago
"He didn't harass women during the two days I interacted with him, therefore he has never done so" is not as strong a defense as you seem to think.
- KSteffensen 7y ago
  "I heard somebody say he harassed women, so he must have done so" is also not as strong an attack as you seem to think.
- lostjohnny 7y ago
  > He didn't harass women during the two days I interacted with him, therefore he has never done so Exactly, he's innocent until proven guilty, like everybody else. You're implying that "I heard from someone that heard it from someone else, that heard it from their dad, that read it on a mailing list, 20 years ago, that he did, therefore ho did"
- bmsleight_ 7y ago
  When did you stop beating your wife ?

lostjohnny 7y ago

> It seems seems does not qualify as evidence > circles that interacted with RMS Like Thomas Lord? https://archive.is/7qepC https://archive.is/7qepC

jacobush 7y ago
You don't there is enough mud to go around? MIT can do the Yogi Berra schtick by throwing Stallman out. But if so, it still does not automatically follow that it was the wrong thing to do.
- lostjohnny 7y ago
  > You don't there is enough mud to go around? I think there is only mud, not based on any real issue with what Stallman said or did. > does not automatically follow that it was the wrong thing to do. It does. FSF main goal was freedom and protecting fundamental liberties of each individual Stallman main contribution to FSF was the GPL, a legal framework, FSF main contribution was pro bono legal support defending free software in court. So, yeah, if FSF cannot defend its founder, most popular and most honorable member, it becomes basically useless, it follows it was the wrong thing to do. Their reputation was based on trust, trust has been broken.