>were not illegal or intentionally offensive. I'm not sure how you can claim to know his intent 18 months after the fact. Do you have an interview or personal

>were not illegal or intentionally offensive. I'm not sure how you can claim to know his intent 18 months after the fact. Do you have an interview or personal relationship to back that claim up? A whole lot of people he directly worked with definitely don't agree with your assessment of his intent. I don't believe in the time since that he has acknowledged the comments or suggested he didn't mean to offend or that he understands why it was probably a pretty horrible thing to say in light of all the things we know about Epstein. Accepting someone for their differences: sure. But to imply Stallman is incapable of acknowledging wrongdoing because of autism while simultaneously being qualified to represent the FSF feels like a reach to me.