5 ms·

Such decisions are not done in a day. The original post, with misinterpretations, appeared on Sep 12, and the resignation happened on Sep 16. The extra "revela

by hvis 7y ago

Such decisions are not done in a day. The original post, with misinterpretations, appeared on Sep 12, and the resignation happened on Sep 16. The extra "revelations" post was also published on Sep 16.

hutzlibu 7y ago
Yes, but was the sign there before, or not? Also, as far as I understood it. The latest thing was just the last straw.
- hvis 7y ago
  The sign was probably there for decades. If it was problematic, I'm sure some of the university staff would have removed it. So which "latest thing" was the last straw and how?
  - hutzlibu 7y ago
    "The "hot ladies" stuff was tacked on later to try to justify the dismissal" "The sign was probably there for decades" How about "sorry for spreading misinformation"? "So which "latest thing" was the last straw and how?" So you did not read the medium blogpost that started this, at all?
    - hvis 7y ago
      > How about "sorry for spreading misinformation"? By "stuff" I mean all the subsequent "revelations" about his character. > So you did not read the medium blogpost that started this, at all? So you meant the event where he tried to defend his deceased colleague? That "last straw"? How dare he.
      - hutzlibu 7y ago
        Ok, I misunderstood your comment then. "So you meant the event where he tried to defend his deceased colleague?" Yes, that is what I mean. Because for some weird reason, women are sensitive to women being sexually exploited. And the Epstein topic is loaded. It is not about that he defended him, it is about how. And Epstein was convicted before. "He was convicted of only these two crimes as part of a plea deal; federal officials had in fact identified 36 girls, some as young as 14 years old, whom Epstein had sexually abused" Minsky did associate with him nevertheless. So whether there actually was sex or not ... if RMS says the most plausible sitution was that the women was "entirely willingly" .. is insensitive and stupid at least. Because every sex abuser says the victim was willing. So if RMS uses then this exact argument, of course that triggers and backfires.
        hvis 7y ago
        > It is not about that he defended him, it is about how. He didn't defend Epstein. Quite the opposite. > Minsky did associate with him nevertheless. Apparently, so did many, many other people. Very few of which have somehow been mentioned in this scandal. Anyway, that is obviously reaching. Simply being in the vicinity of a known convict is not a reason for having a career destroyed. And Stallman himself wasn't there. > is insensitive and stupid at least Yes, well. It was. It doesn't mean that the following witch hunt was justified. People are entitled to being stupid somtimes. > Because every sex abuser says the victim was willing. Imagine yourself in a position where someone is saying your good friend of decades is a rapist. And there's some evidence that intercourse happened, but the details are unknown. And the friend is unable to defend himself. Would you keep silent?
- lostjohnny 7y ago
  > Yes, but was the sign there before, or not? The story is well known The sign was there And together with it there was an Amnesty International sticker. So it really depends on what people want to see, more than what's really there. I've seen much worse sign, like professors not receiving at their office even if they were required to, posting signs with the new address where you could find them (usually their private studio office) And they only received if it was "really needed" otherwise you just sent an email and waited. That's what made me really furious when I was a student. Women were more concerned that they traveled 100kms from their home towns to meet the professor and talk about their thesis and finding their door shut, not of some stupid signs that was clearly a joke made by someone who wasn't a threat to anybody. The real threat came from the polite, well dressed, highly educated, power angry monsters, those like Epstein. Stallman is the exact opposite of that kind of men.
  - hutzlibu 7y ago
    "The real threat came from the polite, well dressed, highly educated, power angry monsters, those like Epstein. Stallman is the exact opposite of that kind of men." But he defended someone who associated with Epstein and who had sex with an underage girl, he got from Epstein.
    - lostjohnny 7y ago
      > But he defended someone who associated with Epstein and who had sex with an underage girl, he got from Epstein. He did not. I think it's time to cut with the BS! - according to the sources Minsky never had sex with the girl, if you have proof of the contrary, please provide them - Stallman was not defending Minsky, in fact he even assumed the sex happened, he was arguing against using the term "sexual assault" because its legal definition is very different from the everyday connotation But I found something I think you might enjoy. I found someone who probably nailed it How about, if the old person would be mick jagger? I could imagine, he still has his charms to some. Also I have seen young attractive women aproaching old yoga gurus for example .. But yeah, the old guy wasn't mick jagger, nor a yoga master and at best he did assume the girl was a 18+ old prostitue doing it willingly for money and power And he (Minsky) turned her down. p.s. the author of that comment is you

by hvis 7y ago

hutzlibu 7y ago

Yes, but was the sign there before, or not? Also, as far as I understood it. The latest thing was just the last straw.

hvis 7y ago
The sign was probably there for decades. If it was problematic, I'm sure some of the university staff would have removed it. So which "latest thing" was the last straw and how?
- hutzlibu 7y ago
  "The "hot ladies" stuff was tacked on later to try to justify the dismissal" "The sign was probably there for decades" How about "sorry for spreading misinformation"? "So which "latest thing" was the last straw and how?" So you did not read the medium blogpost that started this, at all?
  - hvis 7y ago
    > How about "sorry for spreading misinformation"? By "stuff" I mean all the subsequent "revelations" about his character. > So you did not read the medium blogpost that started this, at all? So you meant the event where he tried to defend his deceased colleague? That "last straw"? How dare he.
    - hutzlibu 7y ago
      Ok, I misunderstood your comment then. "So you meant the event where he tried to defend his deceased colleague?" Yes, that is what I mean. Because for some weird reason, women are sensitive to women being sexually exploited. And the Epstein topic is loaded. It is not about that he defended him, it is about how. And Epstein was convicted before. "He was convicted of only these two crimes as part of a plea deal; federal officials had in fact identified 36 girls, some as young as 14 years old, whom Epstein had sexually abused" Minsky did associate with him nevertheless. So whether there actually was sex or not ... if RMS says the most plausible sitution was that the women was "entirely willingly" .. is insensitive and stupid at least. Because every sex abuser says the victim was willing. So if RMS uses then this exact argument, of course that triggers and backfires.
      - hvis 7y ago
        > It is not about that he defended him, it is about how. He didn't defend Epstein. Quite the opposite. > Minsky did associate with him nevertheless. Apparently, so did many, many other people. Very few of which have somehow been mentioned in this scandal. Anyway, that is obviously reaching. Simply being in the vicinity of a known convict is not a reason for having a career destroyed. And Stallman himself wasn't there. > is insensitive and stupid at least Yes, well. It was. It doesn't mean that the following witch hunt was justified. People are entitled to being stupid somtimes. > Because every sex abuser says the victim was willing. Imagine yourself in a position where someone is saying your good friend of decades is a rapist. And there's some evidence that intercourse happened, but the details are unknown. And the friend is unable to defend himself. Would you keep silent?
lostjohnny 7y ago
> Yes, but was the sign there before, or not? The story is well known The sign was there And together with it there was an Amnesty International sticker. So it really depends on what people want to see, more than what's really there. I've seen much worse sign, like professors not receiving at their office even if they were required to, posting signs with the new address where you could find them (usually their private studio office) And they only received if it was "really needed" otherwise you just sent an email and waited. That's what made me really furious when I was a student. Women were more concerned that they traveled 100kms from their home towns to meet the professor and talk about their thesis and finding their door shut, not of some stupid signs that was clearly a joke made by someone who wasn't a threat to anybody. The real threat came from the polite, well dressed, highly educated, power angry monsters, those like Epstein. Stallman is the exact opposite of that kind of men.
- hutzlibu 7y ago
  "The real threat came from the polite, well dressed, highly educated, power angry monsters, those like Epstein. Stallman is the exact opposite of that kind of men." But he defended someone who associated with Epstein and who had sex with an underage girl, he got from Epstein.
  - lostjohnny 7y ago
    > But he defended someone who associated with Epstein and who had sex with an underage girl, he got from Epstein. He did not. I think it's time to cut with the BS! - according to the sources Minsky never had sex with the girl, if you have proof of the contrary, please provide them - Stallman was not defending Minsky, in fact he even assumed the sex happened, he was arguing against using the term "sexual assault" because its legal definition is very different from the everyday connotation But I found something I think you might enjoy. I found someone who probably nailed it How about, if the old person would be mick jagger? I could imagine, he still has his charms to some. Also I have seen young attractive women aproaching old yoga gurus for example .. But yeah, the old guy wasn't mick jagger, nor a yoga master and at best he did assume the girl was a 18+ old prostitue doing it willingly for money and power And he (Minsky) turned her down. p.s. the author of that comment is you