4 ms·

Stallman has been a 'creep' for decades is all I keep hearing from people in these threads. So why is it that all his victims from decades of his 'creepy' behav

Stallman has been a 'creep' for decades is all I keep hearing from people in these threads. So why is it that all his victims from decades of his 'creepy' behaviour do not come forward and LEGALLY take action against him? Is the USA not one of the most empowered countries for women? If not in the USA then where? Repeated accusations on the Internet don't count. This is just digital version of character assassination. A lot of people seem to have hated and resented him for various reasons (something that all long-standing leaders accumulate), and they seem to have seized on a suitable 'faux-pas' to whip up as much frenzy as they can and do maximum possible social damage to him. And not one will pursue credible, legal redressal. To an outsider with no skin anywhere in this, it is just shameful how this has played out.

zby 7y ago
I think the root of the this was misinterpretations of 'creep' - publicly eating something from your foot might be called creepy - but there is no law against it and it is not against women in any way.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
x220 7y ago
Creep is a useless term. You can say that anything is creepy.
- imtringued 7y ago
  But it's always better if something isn't creepy, right? So if we remove all the creepy things everything will be better!
  - dependenttypes 7y ago
    Creepiness is in the eye of the beholder, considering that one of the ways to get rid of it is to remove the people who think that a certain action is creepy for example. Reality is more complex than that though - just like it would be a net-negative to remove a victim of constant harassment in order to reduce creepiness it would also be a net-negative if we removed someone who asked someone else once on a date because someone found it creepy.
    - ryandrake 7y ago
      Exactly. Words like "creepy" (and "beautiful" for that matter) are not inherent attributes of a person. They are labels applied by the recipient of some action after the fact, based entirely on the recipient's thoughts and emotions. So, something I do can be interpreted as creepy by one person but totally fine by another. Does that automatically make me creepy? Someone, somewhere might find me to be good looking (I can only imagine). Does that automatically make me an inherently good looking person?
  - x220 7y ago
    People have called Brad Pitt "creepy". Would you rather live in a world where Brad Pitt had never acted so that some people wouldn't have to see his "creepiness"?
Jonnax 7y ago
In these threads? On hacker news he has almost universal support. Why would any victim want to destroy their careers by making a lawsuit against such a prominent person. People like the majority of posters in this thread will call the accuser a character assassin, fame seeker or a liar. "Is the USA not one of the most empowered countries for women?" Lol. Just call them a liar and become president or get a seat on the supreme court.
watwut 7y ago
Not knowing details of accusations, but harassment and criminal harassment is not the same thing. The legal system line on where you can use it is quite high and rightly so. I can literally verbally abuse you quite a lot before it becomes criminal or even possible to get restraining order (which is easier). Technically, groping and such are illegal, but unless you have a lot of money quite pointless to try to press the charges and court wont be eager to do whole lot against it anyway (cause they will see groping issue as waste of resources and he said she said issue). I did not heard any accusation that would cross the legal line afaik. The accusations I have seen are all about inapropriate this or that, but I did not seen accusation of rape or anything like that. Plus, the actual players involved in that institution seem to talk about these issues in person. Not on blogs or journals. We do not know who came forward with what in FSF or MIT.
einpoklum 7y ago
> Stallman has been a 'creep' for decades is all I keep hearing from people in these threads. So why is it that all his victims from decades of his 'creepy' behaviour do not come forward and LEGALLY take action against him? Forgetting Stallman for a second - This is a weak argument. There are many reasons not to step forward with public accusations of someone; even more reasons not to take legal action; and even more reasons if that person is famous and has significant public credit. Also, indeed, after a person casts the first stone at someone, others are quick to follow - but that doesn't mean they don't have a good reason to cast a stone; it's just an aspect of human group/mass psychology.
- sooheon 7y ago
  How do you think we should distinguish justified and unjustified stonings, if not by due process?
  - einpoklum 7y ago
    If you mean "due process" in the sense of criminal law - that's certainly not it, for at least two reasons: 1. It puts a very high bar for establishing guilt (at least in principle; in practice it might be a toss-up), commensurate with the punishment being state violence, which is supposed to be a rare and extreme measure not be taken lightly (again, in practice, the US loves to convinct and jail people). 2. A lot of deplorable behavior is legal; and some acceptable or even worthy behavior is illegal.
astura 7y ago
It's not illegal to be a creepy weirdo. I don't recall hearing of any behavior from Stallman that was illegal, just merely socially inappropriate or weird. That doesn't mean it MUST be 100% tolerated in all capacities though - many organizations might not want to have a creepy weirdo without social graces as their president. I don't have a personal opinion if Stallman should have been pressured to resign from the FSF or MIT it not, it's not my place to judge. I admit I've never been a fan of his though - he's always come off as incredibly grating to me.

zby 7y ago

I think the root of the this was misinterpretations of 'creep' - publicly eating something from your foot might be called creepy - but there is no law against it and it is not against women in any way.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

x220 7y ago

Creep is a useless term. You can say that anything is creepy.

imtringued 7y ago
But it's always better if something isn't creepy, right? So if we remove all the creepy things everything will be better!
- dependenttypes 7y ago
  Creepiness is in the eye of the beholder, considering that one of the ways to get rid of it is to remove the people who think that a certain action is creepy for example. Reality is more complex than that though - just like it would be a net-negative to remove a victim of constant harassment in order to reduce creepiness it would also be a net-negative if we removed someone who asked someone else once on a date because someone found it creepy.
  - ryandrake 7y ago
    Exactly. Words like "creepy" (and "beautiful" for that matter) are not inherent attributes of a person. They are labels applied by the recipient of some action after the fact, based entirely on the recipient's thoughts and emotions. So, something I do can be interpreted as creepy by one person but totally fine by another. Does that automatically make me creepy? Someone, somewhere might find me to be good looking (I can only imagine). Does that automatically make me an inherently good looking person?
- x220 7y ago
  People have called Brad Pitt "creepy". Would you rather live in a world where Brad Pitt had never acted so that some people wouldn't have to see his "creepiness"?

Jonnax 7y ago

In these threads? On hacker news he has almost universal support. Why would any victim want to destroy their careers by making a lawsuit against such a prominent person. People like the majority of posters in this thread will call the accuser a character assassin, fame seeker or a liar. "Is the USA not one of the most empowered countries for women?" Lol. Just call them a liar and become president or get a seat on the supreme court.

watwut 7y ago

Not knowing details of accusations, but harassment and criminal harassment is not the same thing. The legal system line on where you can use it is quite high and rightly so. I can literally verbally abuse you quite a lot before it becomes criminal or even possible to get restraining order (which is easier). Technically, groping and such are illegal, but unless you have a lot of money quite pointless to try to press the charges and court wont be eager to do whole lot against it anyway (cause they will see groping issue as waste of resources and he said she said issue). I did not heard any accusation that would cross the legal line afaik. The accusations I have seen are all about inapropriate this or that, but I did not seen accusation of rape or anything like that. Plus, the actual players involved in that institution seem to talk about these issues in person. Not on blogs or journals. We do not know who came forward with what in FSF or MIT.

einpoklum 7y ago

> Stallman has been a 'creep' for decades is all I keep hearing from people in these threads. So why is it that all his victims from decades of his 'creepy' behaviour do not come forward and LEGALLY take action against him? Forgetting Stallman for a second - This is a weak argument. There are many reasons not to step forward with public accusations of someone; even more reasons not to take legal action; and even more reasons if that person is famous and has significant public credit. Also, indeed, after a person casts the first stone at someone, others are quick to follow - but that doesn't mean they don't have a good reason to cast a stone; it's just an aspect of human group/mass psychology.

sooheon 7y ago
How do you think we should distinguish justified and unjustified stonings, if not by due process?
- einpoklum 7y ago
  If you mean "due process" in the sense of criminal law - that's certainly not it, for at least two reasons: 1. It puts a very high bar for establishing guilt (at least in principle; in practice it might be a toss-up), commensurate with the punishment being state violence, which is supposed to be a rare and extreme measure not be taken lightly (again, in practice, the US loves to convinct and jail people). 2. A lot of deplorable behavior is legal; and some acceptable or even worthy behavior is illegal.

astura 7y ago

It's not illegal to be a creepy weirdo. I don't recall hearing of any behavior from Stallman that was illegal, just merely socially inappropriate or weird. That doesn't mean it MUST be 100% tolerated in all capacities though - many organizations might not want to have a creepy weirdo without social graces as their president. I don't have a personal opinion if Stallman should have been pressured to resign from the FSF or MIT it not, it's not my place to judge. I admit I've never been a fan of his though - he's always come off as incredibly grating to me.