11 ms·

I don't see how this is relevant _at all_ to the linked article. You seem to be taking existing arguments that aren't even related to RMS's case and arguing aga

I don't see how this is relevant _at all_ to the linked article. You seem to be taking existing arguments that aren't even related to RMS's case and arguing against a strawman of an extreme version of them. No "mob justice" happened here. No women came forward and said RMS "hit on them" or whatever. RMS faced criticism for comments which justified rape and were close to victim blaming, and willingly resigned from his position at the FSF because of it. A position I personally believe he could have kept had he decided not to resign (and the fact that he is able to return to it so soon after leaving suggests I am correct). Edit: I think that several people are placing too much importance on the "willingly resigned" part of my comment downthread. If you believe that RMS was forced out and he had no choice in the matter (i.e. it was "resign or get fired"), then feel free to replace the words "willingly resigned" with "was fired" in my comment (and ignore the last sentence in that paragraph), the point being made still stands.

lanevorockz 6y ago
Don't rewrite history, main reason Richard was pushed out was a MeToo/racism witch hunt against him. He was not the only one attacked on it, most heads of open source projects were also a target at the same time.
- cmeacham98 6y ago
  Every[1] reputable[2] source[3] I[4] can[5] find[6] (literally just the top search results for "stallman resigns" that have any info about the reason) says that Stallman resigned over his comments defending a fellow computer scientist over his participation in the Epstein scandal. Do you have a reason to believe otherwise? 1: https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/17/20870050/richard-stallman-resigns-mit-free-software-foundation-epstein https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/17/20870050/richard-stallman... 2: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/09/17/richard-stallman-has-resigned-as-president-of-the-free-software-foundation/?sh=2f6a0a855272 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/09/17/richa... 3: https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/16/computer-scientist-richard-stallman-who-defended-jeffrey-epstein-resigns-from-mit-csail-and-the-free-software-foundation/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/16/computer-scientist-richard... 4: https://www.vice.com/en/article/mbm74x/computer-scientist-richard-stallman-resigns-from-mit-over-epstein-comments https://www.vice.com/en/article/mbm74x/computer-scientist-ri... 5: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/09/17/computer-scientist-richard-stallman-resigns-mit-after-comments-about-epstein-scandal/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/09/17/computer... 6: https://www.cnet.com/news/computer-scientist-richard-stallman-resigns-from-mit-after-jeffrey-epstein-comments/ https://www.cnet.com/news/computer-scientist-richard-stallma...
  - undecisive 6y ago
    I think the issue here is that you've misunderstood the politics of these kinds of "resignations". In the public mind (even if not in reality) when someone "resigns" because of "past comments", they have either been given an ultimatum - "Jump or be pushed" - or they are experiencing intrusions into their personal life (or there is behaviour from the community that makes this person believe these intrusions are imminent) My understanding at the time was that it was the former - there were murmurings of possible action against him, and whether it was to avoid harm to the FSF or risk the public damage to his reputation I have no idea, but he decided to gracefully step aside. So yes, officially you may be correct - but especially with someone like RMS, it is highly unlikely that he just chose to resign because he previously made comments that people didn't like. RMS is very used to making controversial statements and weathering the storm, I find it unlikely (though not impossible) that this was just one storm he couldn't weather - and much more likely that he chose the path of least damage, to himself or his cause or his legacy.
    - 1000units 6y ago
      It's somewhat incredible this guy went through six articles but couldn't find the actual resignation, which is very short and settles the question very clearly. How do we explain this? To the FSF board, I hereby resign as president of the Free Software Foundation and from its board of directors. I am doing this due to pressure on the Foundation and me over a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations of what I have said. Richard Stallman edit. Downvoters: You never belonged here. You're the reason this place is garbage now. Don't you dare follow me to the next place. You stay on HN now. When the time comes even you can recognize only utter ruins, I'm not letting you in. You deserve what you make.
      - cmeacham98 6y ago
        I decided not to link it because it provides no context to what those things "I have said" are (and several of those news articles quote or link it themselves). News articles from around the time provide said context.
- hutzlibu 6y ago
  But it was no vague anonymous - he once hit on me - lynch mob, but very concrete criticism of RMS. Things he said and did in the past - and in the present. (only thing would be, that his "voluntary resign" was obviously done with a lot of pressure)
  - nyolfen 6y ago
    one of those criticisms as a i recall was 'he had a mattress in his office' as if this suggested something untoward rather than him sleeping in his office
    - dralley 6y ago
      No. If you go back and look at that accusation, it was that he was propositioning people for sex in the halls of MIT, AND he had a mattress in his office.
      - nyolfen 6y ago
        > propositioning people for sex in the halls of MIT you are going to need to cite that. the only accusations of 'sexual harassment' i have seen are asking women at conferences on dates.
        jkaplowitz 6y ago
        That counts as harassment in my opinion if it happens without at least some reasonable reason to believe the women may be interested in dating him, if he persists with a given woman after she doesn't respond with interest, if there is any sort of power dynamic or other coercive context in place that might make the woman feel not free to decline without social or professional penalty (within a community like the free software world this obstacle would often be present in relation to someone like RMS who is prominent within that community), if he makes a habit of propositioning people in professional contexts, or if he asks women out in unprofessional ways like inappropriate touching. If none of these patterns occur, it's probably not harassment, but I suspect he does some of them. And if it is harassment, I'd probably say it's sexual harassment since it relates to unwanted seeking of romantic or sexual relationships in a professional environment.
- thefz 6y ago
  Honestly I think they went after Stallman because he is a prominent figure and at the same time white, male and not exactly in his twenties.
  - hutzlibu 6y ago
    Ah yes, the great conspiracy against white men. The porest, most underprivileged and oppressed group on this earth. We have to unite!
    - ertian 6y ago
      Well that's a hell of a strawman...
      - hutzlibu 6y ago
        "because he is a prominent figure and at the same time white, male" Oh right. I probably confused parent posters words for .. I don't know. Isn't he or she (less likely) exactly saying this? That RMS was targeted because he is white and male and not because of what he did and said? How is that not thinking along the lines of conspiracy? Exaggerated, yes. But strawman? Where exactly?
        thefz 6y ago
        The fact that one demographic is or is not statistically oppressed does not absolutely warrant for any of its members the impossibility of not being targeted or harassed. And there is a quite large movement of people online "bored" of white old dudes. Let alone the movement trying to undermine meritocracy in the name of inclusion via intersectionality.
        ertian 6y ago
        There's a huuuuge gap between "some prominent old white dudes might be targeted in specific communities" and "white guys are the most persecuted people on earth." When the Stallman thing was still fresh, I saw people online argue that it _didn't really matter_ whether Minsky actually did anything wrong, or whether it was inappropriate for Stallman to defend him. There are too many old white guys in prominent positions in tech, and reducing their numbers is a good thing. Sure it'll mess up Stallman's life, but whatever, that's a small price to pay for progress. In other words, explicitly: it's okay to target him, even if the accusations aren't correct, because he's an old white guy. I think that's something people really believe. I also think it's unfair, and shouldn't be tolerated. And yet...I don't believe anything _close_ to the argument you put in OP's mouth (and by extension, mine). No, white guys aren't even close to the most persecuted people on the planet--and yet, that doesn't make them immune from persecution in all forms, either. So: you attempted to rebut an argument by reducing it to a ridiculous caricature of itself. That's called a strawman.
Siira 6y ago
> willingly resigned Voluntary suicides are in your pipeline as well, no? Dictatorship sure doesn’t innovate.
- literallycancer 6y ago
  Nah, it works better when you make it possible for the monsters and demons to discover the error of their ways and redeem themselves in a voluntary labor camp.
joana035 6y ago
As a woman who, at my 16 was able to fool many men in selling me alcohol and nicotine, was able to interpret RMS arguments properly. It's a shame that his words are being twisted once again after everything he went through.
- api 6y ago
  I can understand what Stallman meant, but I am not at all surprised at the reaction. This particular case has little to do with him hitting on women around him. This had been happening for decades and most people just rolled their eyes and made fun of him behind his back about it. This had everything to do with MIT's exposure to Epstein. MIT gets outed as having numerous researchers who took money from and traveled with a convicted pedophile sex abuser, sex trafficker, and likely financial criminal, and Stallman writes an e-mail that sounds very much as if he's obliquely defending Epstein. I imagine someone at MIT's communications office having a heart attack. "Oh fuck shut this idiot up NOW!" someone probably shouted. This wasn't #metoo. This was Stallman embarrassing MIT and numerous powerful people. I feel sort of sorry for Stallman because it's clear that he's "on the spectrum" or at least is the sort of person who thinks ultra-logically and doesn't understand the irrational power machinations of politics. He felt like he was writing something logical, and he was, but he stepped in a gigantic bear trap that would have been obvious to anyone with any social understanding. Pro tip: if your institution is enmeshed in scandal, keep your mouth shut unless you are coordinating with your communications department or whomever is in charge of such things. If you do check, 99% of the time they will tell you to keep your mouth shut. If you do open your mouth, even with good intentions, polish up your CV first. It amuses me that this entire 500+ post thread is about "cancel culture" when that's not what happened at all in this case.
  - eliasdaler 6y ago
    "... and Stallman writes an e-mail that sounds very much as if he's obliquely defending Epstein" Complete misinterpretation of what RMS has written about. He defended Minsky, not Epstein.
    - 6y ago
u801e 6y ago
> willingly resigned from his position at the FSF because of it. I don't think willingly is the best way to put it. It was more along the lines that he was told there would be consequences and he could avoid them if he resigned.
- cmeacham98 6y ago
  It's possible this is true, although I personally suspect if he was willing to put out a statement that said something like (paraphrasing) "I did a dumb thing, I'm sorry, I now understand why rape is bad, and I'll work on being better about understanding why these types of things are bad" he would have kept the position. However, even if I'm wrong, and he really was forced to resign, I don't think it detracts that much from my point that GP is arguing against strawmen like "fired for hitting on a women and being rejected" that are completely unrelated to RMS's case.
  - belorn 6y ago
    He could write out an exact description of what he said and what he has changed his views on, but I doubt people who has seen the media characterization of his comments would be made any happier. He could say "I previous thought the word sexual assault meant the word assault added a qualifier that required the application of force or violence, but I now know that the word assault in this case mean a legal definition that also includes negligent to seek consent and absent of intent to cause harm.". Would that change the media perception?
    - cmeacham98 6y ago
      It would change my perception, I can't really pretend to speak for "the media" though.
  - refenestrator 6y ago
    Nah, that is an optimally bad strategy. Don't concede things you didn't actually say or mean in the hope that it will mollify people, it never works and will only be held against you.
literallycancer 6y ago
Have you read the comments in question?
omgJustTest 6y ago
Perhaps they are giving you a bit of stallman-esk justice? Mincing the words was somewhat “the thing”. It’s scary to have any of these conversations. They need to happen, we also need to recognize that this is a gray scale of human experience and that the response isn’t “fired or glorified”

lanevorockz 6y ago

Don't rewrite history, main reason Richard was pushed out was a MeToo/racism witch hunt against him. He was not the only one attacked on it, most heads of open source projects were also a target at the same time.

cmeacham98 6y ago
Every[1] reputable[2] source[3] I[4] can[5] find[6] (literally just the top search results for "stallman resigns" that have any info about the reason) says that Stallman resigned over his comments defending a fellow computer scientist over his participation in the Epstein scandal. Do you have a reason to believe otherwise? 1: https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/17/20870050/richard-stallman-resigns-mit-free-software-foundation-epstein https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/17/20870050/richard-stallman... 2: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/09/17/richard-stallman-has-resigned-as-president-of-the-free-software-foundation/?sh=2f6a0a855272 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/09/17/richa... 3: https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/16/computer-scientist-richard-stallman-who-defended-jeffrey-epstein-resigns-from-mit-csail-and-the-free-software-foundation/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/16/computer-scientist-richard... 4: https://www.vice.com/en/article/mbm74x/computer-scientist-richard-stallman-resigns-from-mit-over-epstein-comments https://www.vice.com/en/article/mbm74x/computer-scientist-ri... 5: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/09/17/computer-scientist-richard-stallman-resigns-mit-after-comments-about-epstein-scandal/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/09/17/computer... 6: https://www.cnet.com/news/computer-scientist-richard-stallman-resigns-from-mit-after-jeffrey-epstein-comments/ https://www.cnet.com/news/computer-scientist-richard-stallma...
- undecisive 6y ago
  I think the issue here is that you've misunderstood the politics of these kinds of "resignations". In the public mind (even if not in reality) when someone "resigns" because of "past comments", they have either been given an ultimatum - "Jump or be pushed" - or they are experiencing intrusions into their personal life (or there is behaviour from the community that makes this person believe these intrusions are imminent) My understanding at the time was that it was the former - there were murmurings of possible action against him, and whether it was to avoid harm to the FSF or risk the public damage to his reputation I have no idea, but he decided to gracefully step aside. So yes, officially you may be correct - but especially with someone like RMS, it is highly unlikely that he just chose to resign because he previously made comments that people didn't like. RMS is very used to making controversial statements and weathering the storm, I find it unlikely (though not impossible) that this was just one storm he couldn't weather - and much more likely that he chose the path of least damage, to himself or his cause or his legacy.
  - 1000units 6y ago
    It's somewhat incredible this guy went through six articles but couldn't find the actual resignation, which is very short and settles the question very clearly. How do we explain this? To the FSF board, I hereby resign as president of the Free Software Foundation and from its board of directors. I am doing this due to pressure on the Foundation and me over a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations of what I have said. Richard Stallman edit. Downvoters: You never belonged here. You're the reason this place is garbage now. Don't you dare follow me to the next place. You stay on HN now. When the time comes even you can recognize only utter ruins, I'm not letting you in. You deserve what you make.
    - cmeacham98 6y ago
      I decided not to link it because it provides no context to what those things "I have said" are (and several of those news articles quote or link it themselves). News articles from around the time provide said context.
hutzlibu 6y ago
But it was no vague anonymous - he once hit on me - lynch mob, but very concrete criticism of RMS. Things he said and did in the past - and in the present. (only thing would be, that his "voluntary resign" was obviously done with a lot of pressure)
- nyolfen 6y ago
  one of those criticisms as a i recall was 'he had a mattress in his office' as if this suggested something untoward rather than him sleeping in his office
  - dralley 6y ago
    No. If you go back and look at that accusation, it was that he was propositioning people for sex in the halls of MIT, AND he had a mattress in his office.
    - nyolfen 6y ago
      > propositioning people for sex in the halls of MIT you are going to need to cite that. the only accusations of 'sexual harassment' i have seen are asking women at conferences on dates.
      - jkaplowitz 6y ago
        That counts as harassment in my opinion if it happens without at least some reasonable reason to believe the women may be interested in dating him, if he persists with a given woman after she doesn't respond with interest, if there is any sort of power dynamic or other coercive context in place that might make the woman feel not free to decline without social or professional penalty (within a community like the free software world this obstacle would often be present in relation to someone like RMS who is prominent within that community), if he makes a habit of propositioning people in professional contexts, or if he asks women out in unprofessional ways like inappropriate touching. If none of these patterns occur, it's probably not harassment, but I suspect he does some of them. And if it is harassment, I'd probably say it's sexual harassment since it relates to unwanted seeking of romantic or sexual relationships in a professional environment.
thefz 6y ago
Honestly I think they went after Stallman because he is a prominent figure and at the same time white, male and not exactly in his twenties.
- hutzlibu 6y ago
  Ah yes, the great conspiracy against white men. The porest, most underprivileged and oppressed group on this earth. We have to unite!
  - ertian 6y ago
    Well that's a hell of a strawman...
    - hutzlibu 6y ago
      "because he is a prominent figure and at the same time white, male" Oh right. I probably confused parent posters words for .. I don't know. Isn't he or she (less likely) exactly saying this? That RMS was targeted because he is white and male and not because of what he did and said? How is that not thinking along the lines of conspiracy? Exaggerated, yes. But strawman? Where exactly?
      - thefz 6y ago
        The fact that one demographic is or is not statistically oppressed does not absolutely warrant for any of its members the impossibility of not being targeted or harassed. And there is a quite large movement of people online "bored" of white old dudes. Let alone the movement trying to undermine meritocracy in the name of inclusion via intersectionality.
      - ertian 6y ago
        There's a huuuuge gap between "some prominent old white dudes might be targeted in specific communities" and "white guys are the most persecuted people on earth." When the Stallman thing was still fresh, I saw people online argue that it _didn't really matter_ whether Minsky actually did anything wrong, or whether it was inappropriate for Stallman to defend him. There are too many old white guys in prominent positions in tech, and reducing their numbers is a good thing. Sure it'll mess up Stallman's life, but whatever, that's a small price to pay for progress. In other words, explicitly: it's okay to target him, even if the accusations aren't correct, because he's an old white guy. I think that's something people really believe. I also think it's unfair, and shouldn't be tolerated. And yet...I don't believe anything _close_ to the argument you put in OP's mouth (and by extension, mine). No, white guys aren't even close to the most persecuted people on the planet--and yet, that doesn't make them immune from persecution in all forms, either. So: you attempted to rebut an argument by reducing it to a ridiculous caricature of itself. That's called a strawman.

Siira 6y ago

> willingly resigned Voluntary suicides are in your pipeline as well, no? Dictatorship sure doesn’t innovate.

literallycancer 6y ago
Nah, it works better when you make it possible for the monsters and demons to discover the error of their ways and redeem themselves in a voluntary labor camp.

joana035 6y ago

As a woman who, at my 16 was able to fool many men in selling me alcohol and nicotine, was able to interpret RMS arguments properly. It's a shame that his words are being twisted once again after everything he went through.

api 6y ago
I can understand what Stallman meant, but I am not at all surprised at the reaction. This particular case has little to do with him hitting on women around him. This had been happening for decades and most people just rolled their eyes and made fun of him behind his back about it. This had everything to do with MIT's exposure to Epstein. MIT gets outed as having numerous researchers who took money from and traveled with a convicted pedophile sex abuser, sex trafficker, and likely financial criminal, and Stallman writes an e-mail that sounds very much as if he's obliquely defending Epstein. I imagine someone at MIT's communications office having a heart attack. "Oh fuck shut this idiot up NOW!" someone probably shouted. This wasn't #metoo. This was Stallman embarrassing MIT and numerous powerful people. I feel sort of sorry for Stallman because it's clear that he's "on the spectrum" or at least is the sort of person who thinks ultra-logically and doesn't understand the irrational power machinations of politics. He felt like he was writing something logical, and he was, but he stepped in a gigantic bear trap that would have been obvious to anyone with any social understanding. Pro tip: if your institution is enmeshed in scandal, keep your mouth shut unless you are coordinating with your communications department or whomever is in charge of such things. If you do check, 99% of the time they will tell you to keep your mouth shut. If you do open your mouth, even with good intentions, polish up your CV first. It amuses me that this entire 500+ post thread is about "cancel culture" when that's not what happened at all in this case.
- eliasdaler 6y ago
  "... and Stallman writes an e-mail that sounds very much as if he's obliquely defending Epstein" Complete misinterpretation of what RMS has written about. He defended Minsky, not Epstein.
  - 6y ago

u801e 6y ago

> willingly resigned from his position at the FSF because of it. I don't think willingly is the best way to put it. It was more along the lines that he was told there would be consequences and he could avoid them if he resigned.

cmeacham98 6y ago
It's possible this is true, although I personally suspect if he was willing to put out a statement that said something like (paraphrasing) "I did a dumb thing, I'm sorry, I now understand why rape is bad, and I'll work on being better about understanding why these types of things are bad" he would have kept the position. However, even if I'm wrong, and he really was forced to resign, I don't think it detracts that much from my point that GP is arguing against strawmen like "fired for hitting on a women and being rejected" that are completely unrelated to RMS's case.
- belorn 6y ago
  He could write out an exact description of what he said and what he has changed his views on, but I doubt people who has seen the media characterization of his comments would be made any happier. He could say "I previous thought the word sexual assault meant the word assault added a qualifier that required the application of force or violence, but I now know that the word assault in this case mean a legal definition that also includes negligent to seek consent and absent of intent to cause harm.". Would that change the media perception?
  - cmeacham98 6y ago
    It would change my perception, I can't really pretend to speak for "the media" though.
- refenestrator 6y ago
  Nah, that is an optimally bad strategy. Don't concede things you didn't actually say or mean in the hope that it will mollify people, it never works and will only be held against you.

literallycancer 6y ago

Have you read the comments in question?

omgJustTest 6y ago

Perhaps they are giving you a bit of stallman-esk justice? Mincing the words was somewhat “the thing”. It’s scary to have any of these conversations. They need to happen, we also need to recognize that this is a gray scale of human experience and that the response isn’t “fired or glorified”