5 ms·

I don't get why he doesn't simply apologize, take a few months break from publicity to think things over and then move on. Instead he seems to prefer to step d

I don't get why he doesn't simply apologize, take a few months break from publicity to think things over and then move on. Instead he seems to prefer to step down from what he has been doing for the last 30 years. Does he really regret nothing? On a human level I sympathize with the women he has offended (I know the story is also about his behavior over the years), but I also worry about him as well, I hope he stays in good health and spirit.

BlackRing 7y ago
Because there's nothing to regret. The article was a hit piece, wildly inaccurate in it's editorialization that equates to a lie. People are foolishly listening to some ignorant ranting that takes everything out of context and my supposition is that it was something people when wanted to jump on when the opportunity arose. People, notably nicknamed SJw's, have been trying to target big names in GNU and Linux for years and is an established fact in many circles of honeytraps trying to snare some of these people. I don't buy this at all as anything less.
- dependenttypes 7y ago
  Just a tip (with no offence intended), you may want to avoid terms like "SJW" in the future if you want your post to be taken seriously or engage in honest discussion with others.
  - BlackRing 7y ago
    When these people title themselves that way it's not inaccurate to use.
    - dependenttypes 7y ago
      Does not need to be inaccurate in order to make other people assume that you are yet another alt-right nutjob and avoid engaging in discussion with you.
      - BlackRing 7y ago
        Unfortunately that's their shortcoming and not mine as I can at least correct my mistakes. Other people aren't keen on correcting theirs nor can I force someone to recognize their own.
        dependenttypes 7y ago
        Usage of said word will only get your posts to be [flagged] [dead], it is up to you, if you want your post to stay on hackernews or not. Mind you, I do not have any authority in this matter. It is just my personal observation that posts that call people SJWs end up dying, just like posts that call people nazis.
        aortega 7y ago
        > posts that call people SJWs end up dying, just like posts that call people nazis. And it's not a coincidence.
        tptacek 7y ago
        You're right. Contrary to popular Twitter opinion, HN is not especially welcoming to Nazis.
  - quotemstr 7y ago
    There are plenty of people, myself included, who won't discount someone's ideas just because he used a word. I don't agree with language policing, especially if it's done with subtle threats to one's reputation.
    - spookthesunset 7y ago
      99% of all people using the term “SJW” are acting in bad faith. It makes sense to dismiss anything using that term. Downvote. If on reddit, look at their history and marvel how many people using that term post to t_d and affiliated subreddits, shake your head at the world today and move on.
      - BlackRing 7y ago
        That's quite the claim. Where's your evidence? I'm only stating a name many of them have branded themselves as, and proudly at that. It's a point of discussion and quite frankly disturbing people make assumptions as to those who use it. Everything is presented verifiable with the smallest of effort.
        spookthesunset 7y ago
        If you use the term not knowing the types of people that use it, that’s on you. Either you are a member of the alt-right (99% chance) or you are profoundly ignorant. Either way, it’s in you. Proof of my claim is simply being in the internet.
        airbreather 7y ago
        And here is the root of many problems, the assumption that someone is "right wing", or "left wing", or whatever, just because of one view or idea known. With the following assumption that their personality, behaviors and thoughts can be predicted. It's usually associated with come kind of bigotry and used as put down describing someone as being in another camp to the writer. There are people in the world who have opinions based on critical thinking that are individually arisen at, per item. Many are just pragmatic. Some just don't have the ability to form a different view in some cases because they have not witnessed or experienced various forms of prejudice, persecution, being exploited and so on. And that doesn't make them privileged, at most it makes them luckily ignorant. There is no "side" or "group" that holds the entire high morel ground in anything. "What if I told you that a bird needs both wings to fly?".
dependenttypes 7y ago
> I don't get why he doesn't simply apologize He could give a fake apology with the hope that this would stop this whole drama, but I believe that he is more principled than that. Plus, apologising for something that you have not done wrong hurts.
- hutzlibu 7y ago
  How about "sorry that I hurt feelings with insensitive wording"? Does only work though, if he is sorry, which is not likely. Because the thing is, allmost all rapist defend themself by saying the victim presented themself willingly and when RMS just declared that the most plausible scenario that the epstein underage prostitute present herself willingly, then he should not be surprised if people understand that wrong and feel hurt, if he has some empathy. Now whether he has some, remains actually unclear to me after all I read now (but I never met him in person). Anyhow, for someone talking so much abouth ethics and leading a organization about it, I believe empathy should be a required skill for leadership, otherwise it can (and was and partly is) be seen as a bad joke.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    Honestly I think the fixation on the Epstein comments is unhelpful for understanding what's happened here. You ever see the science experiment where you supercool a container of distilled water, tap it, and then watch it instantly turn to ice? That's what's happened here. And just as the tap didn't actually freeze the water, neither did the Epstein reporting doom Stallman; rather, it was the long prior history of unfortunate comments about pedophilia and of allegations of harassment. It was a running joke around MIT that women would place ferns in their office to repel him; his notoriety was enough to create special meaning for ferns. It's surprising he lasted as long as he did, just like it's surprising that you can get a jug of water below freezing without actually freezing it.
    - hutzlibu 7y ago
      "Honestly I think the fixation on the Epstein comments is unhelpful for understanding what's happened here." The comments were misquoted and RMS fans believe that this is the sole reason for him being fired and are outraged.
lone_haxx0r 7y ago
Stallman is the least hypocritical person I've ever seen. So, that's not happening unless he changes his mind about something he said. Even if he changes his mind about some subjective things, he will keep saying other things that are objectively true but people don't want to accept.
- tptacek 7y ago
  Just because Stallman isn't a hypocrite doesn't mean things he says are "objectively true". Stallman advocated for the legalization of ("consensual") pedophilia, in those exact terms; that isn't a weird extrapolation of something he said, but rather words he put on his own website.
  - lone_haxx0r 7y ago
    I didn't say that everything he says is objectively true. Some things he says are objectively true. Advocating for the legalization of "consensual pedophilia" (whatever that means) is not an objective truth, it's an opinion.
    - tptacek 7y ago
      That is literally the thing he says that other people don't want to accept; it's the example you yourself referred to. Besides advocating for pedophilia, the problem people have with Stallman is his behavior, not what he says. If you're talking about his problematic words, then what you're talking about is in fact his repeated defense of pedophilia.
      - lone_haxx0r 7y ago
        I never referred to that example. Stallman has said many "problematic" things apart from defending "consensual pedophilia".
        tptacek 7y ago
        I don't think you meant to refer to it; I think you just don't know enough about Stallman or his critics to understand the position you backed yourself into. I assure you, the people calling for Stallman's ouster aren't doing it because of what he thinks of proprietary software, or his support for Bernie Sanders.

BlackRing 7y ago

Because there's nothing to regret. The article was a hit piece, wildly inaccurate in it's editorialization that equates to a lie. People are foolishly listening to some ignorant ranting that takes everything out of context and my supposition is that it was something people when wanted to jump on when the opportunity arose. People, notably nicknamed SJw's, have been trying to target big names in GNU and Linux for years and is an established fact in many circles of honeytraps trying to snare some of these people. I don't buy this at all as anything less.

dependenttypes 7y ago
Just a tip (with no offence intended), you may want to avoid terms like "SJW" in the future if you want your post to be taken seriously or engage in honest discussion with others.
- BlackRing 7y ago
  When these people title themselves that way it's not inaccurate to use.
  - dependenttypes 7y ago
    Does not need to be inaccurate in order to make other people assume that you are yet another alt-right nutjob and avoid engaging in discussion with you.
    - BlackRing 7y ago
      Unfortunately that's their shortcoming and not mine as I can at least correct my mistakes. Other people aren't keen on correcting theirs nor can I force someone to recognize their own.
      - dependenttypes 7y ago
        Usage of said word will only get your posts to be [flagged] [dead], it is up to you, if you want your post to stay on hackernews or not. Mind you, I do not have any authority in this matter. It is just my personal observation that posts that call people SJWs end up dying, just like posts that call people nazis.
        aortega 7y ago
        > posts that call people SJWs end up dying, just like posts that call people nazis. And it's not a coincidence.
        tptacek 7y ago
        You're right. Contrary to popular Twitter opinion, HN is not especially welcoming to Nazis.
- quotemstr 7y ago
  There are plenty of people, myself included, who won't discount someone's ideas just because he used a word. I don't agree with language policing, especially if it's done with subtle threats to one's reputation.
  - spookthesunset 7y ago
    99% of all people using the term “SJW” are acting in bad faith. It makes sense to dismiss anything using that term. Downvote. If on reddit, look at their history and marvel how many people using that term post to t_d and affiliated subreddits, shake your head at the world today and move on.
    - BlackRing 7y ago
      That's quite the claim. Where's your evidence? I'm only stating a name many of them have branded themselves as, and proudly at that. It's a point of discussion and quite frankly disturbing people make assumptions as to those who use it. Everything is presented verifiable with the smallest of effort.
      - spookthesunset 7y ago
        If you use the term not knowing the types of people that use it, that’s on you. Either you are a member of the alt-right (99% chance) or you are profoundly ignorant. Either way, it’s in you. Proof of my claim is simply being in the internet.
        airbreather 7y ago
        And here is the root of many problems, the assumption that someone is "right wing", or "left wing", or whatever, just because of one view or idea known. With the following assumption that their personality, behaviors and thoughts can be predicted. It's usually associated with come kind of bigotry and used as put down describing someone as being in another camp to the writer. There are people in the world who have opinions based on critical thinking that are individually arisen at, per item. Many are just pragmatic. Some just don't have the ability to form a different view in some cases because they have not witnessed or experienced various forms of prejudice, persecution, being exploited and so on. And that doesn't make them privileged, at most it makes them luckily ignorant. There is no "side" or "group" that holds the entire high morel ground in anything. "What if I told you that a bird needs both wings to fly?".

dependenttypes 7y ago

> I don't get why he doesn't simply apologize He could give a fake apology with the hope that this would stop this whole drama, but I believe that he is more principled than that. Plus, apologising for something that you have not done wrong hurts.

hutzlibu 7y ago
How about "sorry that I hurt feelings with insensitive wording"? Does only work though, if he is sorry, which is not likely. Because the thing is, allmost all rapist defend themself by saying the victim presented themself willingly and when RMS just declared that the most plausible scenario that the epstein underage prostitute present herself willingly, then he should not be surprised if people understand that wrong and feel hurt, if he has some empathy. Now whether he has some, remains actually unclear to me after all I read now (but I never met him in person). Anyhow, for someone talking so much abouth ethics and leading a organization about it, I believe empathy should be a required skill for leadership, otherwise it can (and was and partly is) be seen as a bad joke.
- tptacek 7y ago
  Honestly I think the fixation on the Epstein comments is unhelpful for understanding what's happened here. You ever see the science experiment where you supercool a container of distilled water, tap it, and then watch it instantly turn to ice? That's what's happened here. And just as the tap didn't actually freeze the water, neither did the Epstein reporting doom Stallman; rather, it was the long prior history of unfortunate comments about pedophilia and of allegations of harassment. It was a running joke around MIT that women would place ferns in their office to repel him; his notoriety was enough to create special meaning for ferns. It's surprising he lasted as long as he did, just like it's surprising that you can get a jug of water below freezing without actually freezing it.
  - hutzlibu 7y ago
    "Honestly I think the fixation on the Epstein comments is unhelpful for understanding what's happened here." The comments were misquoted and RMS fans believe that this is the sole reason for him being fired and are outraged.

lone_haxx0r 7y ago

Stallman is the least hypocritical person I've ever seen. So, that's not happening unless he changes his mind about something he said. Even if he changes his mind about some subjective things, he will keep saying other things that are objectively true but people don't want to accept.

tptacek 7y ago
Just because Stallman isn't a hypocrite doesn't mean things he says are "objectively true". Stallman advocated for the legalization of ("consensual") pedophilia, in those exact terms; that isn't a weird extrapolation of something he said, but rather words he put on his own website.
- lone_haxx0r 7y ago
  I didn't say that everything he says is objectively true. Some things he says are objectively true. Advocating for the legalization of "consensual pedophilia" (whatever that means) is not an objective truth, it's an opinion.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    That is literally the thing he says that other people don't want to accept; it's the example you yourself referred to. Besides advocating for pedophilia, the problem people have with Stallman is his behavior, not what he says. If you're talking about his problematic words, then what you're talking about is in fact his repeated defense of pedophilia.
    - lone_haxx0r 7y ago
      I never referred to that example. Stallman has said many "problematic" things apart from defending "consensual pedophilia".
      - tptacek 7y ago
        I don't think you meant to refer to it; I think you just don't know enough about Stallman or his critics to understand the position you backed yourself into. I assure you, the people calling for Stallman's ouster aren't doing it because of what he thinks of proprietary software, or his support for Bernie Sanders.