I know people are decrying the sudden exposure of years of actual issues (including warnings/remedial/probation), as well as skepticism about rumors that are fl

I know people are decrying the sudden exposure of years of actual issues (including warnings/remedial/probation), as well as skepticism about rumors that are floating around. None of this is new knowledge. I heard rumors about RMS floating back at Berkeley around 1999-2003. So let's look at the worst case possible circumstance - that a man who repeatedly makes comments that are interpreted as pro-pedophilia and has a history of inappropriate conduct with young (albiet legal) women might actually act in ways that he has publicly justified. In that circumstance, no one can say that the warning signals were not there. That would be on all of us, and leaving him in a position of power would continue the possibility of abuse. For the FSF and GNU to have a future (as opposed to "open source"), they need to evolve beyond Stallman one way or other. Associating these institutions with Stallman going forward exposed them to the risk (worst case) of being the catholic church at Stallman's alter. At best, they are fighting a fight that has nothing to do with their primary mission.