4 ms·

If people's personal stories and experiences aren't "evidence," then indeed you should just look at his written words, which include such gems as taking a chari

by Frondo 7y ago

If people's personal stories and experiences aren't "evidence," then indeed you should just look at his written words, which include such gems as taking a charitable stance toward pedophilia (recanted very recently, after maintaining it as a public position for some decades), his repeated public "emacs virgin" bit, his stated belief that people with down syndrome should be aborted, his habit of giving out "pleasure cards" to colleagues and people he's met at conferences.

concordDance 7y ago
A game of telephone takes place that distorts these stories by the time they get read by us. (Not to mention the memory distortions, my memory is probably not mch worse than anyone elses but I still notice myself misremembering things in favour of some narrative a lot) Also, I can't speak for everyone, but I don't particulalry disagree with or think any of the things you list in your comment are fireable.
- Frondo 7y ago
  Not fireable, for a rank-and-file worker in an organization? Sure, I can see that. Not fireable, for the public role of leader of an organization? They're held to higher standards of conduct, whether we like it or not; holding forth in public on opinions that 1) run counter to mainstream society in a way that's going to piss off a lot of people and 2) have nothing to do with the organization are a distraction, and a sign that leader's losing the thread on what their organization goals are and how to accomplish that. In short, you can lead a software advocacy organization, or you can publish your opinions on aborting fetuses with down syndrome and your skepticism about pedophilia harming children, but you can't do both for long. (Unless you're stallman, then you can do it for decades before someone says, "hey, this guy's making the free software movement look bad".)

4 ms·

If people's personal stories and experiences aren't "evidence," then indeed you should just look at his written words, which include such gems as taking a chari

by Frondo 7y ago

concordDance 7y ago
A game of telephone takes place that distorts these stories by the time they get read by us. (Not to mention the memory distortions, my memory is probably not mch worse than anyone elses but I still notice myself misremembering things in favour of some narrative a lot) Also, I can't speak for everyone, but I don't particulalry disagree with or think any of the things you list in your comment are fireable.
- Frondo 7y ago
  Not fireable, for a rank-and-file worker in an organization? Sure, I can see that. Not fireable, for the public role of leader of an organization? They're held to higher standards of conduct, whether we like it or not; holding forth in public on opinions that 1) run counter to mainstream society in a way that's going to piss off a lot of people and 2) have nothing to do with the organization are a distraction, and a sign that leader's losing the thread on what their organization goals are and how to accomplish that. In short, you can lead a software advocacy organization, or you can publish your opinions on aborting fetuses with down syndrome and your skepticism about pedophilia harming children, but you can't do both for long. (Unless you're stallman, then you can do it for decades before someone says, "hey, this guy's making the free software movement look bad".)