8 ms·

Stallman isn't great, but not the devil

74 points by wchar_t 6y ago

the-dude 6y ago
Still argues for removing RMS, using a creative 'baity' title. Part of the general effort to get RMS removed, flagged for being part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign, nothing new here.
- JBorrow 6y ago
  Can you clarify why you think that makes the article deserve to be flagged? I see it as not spam; it’s a timely post about why a senior member of the open source community is not suitable for a leadership position that they have just taken up.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  How is the title baity simply because you assumed it meant the author agreed with you? There is tons of room between "great" and "the devil", so I had no clue going in which side of the "should he be on the FSF board" line the author was on. Further, how is this "part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign"? It just seems like multiple people, again, have an opinion you don't agree with. That doesn't make it "concerted", with its nefarious undertones.
  - the-dude 6y ago
    That is what seemingly means yes. What is your point again?
- arp242 6y ago
  > being part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign No, it's not. My thoughts are my own. I wrote it after reading through various discussions and feeling a more nuanced take was generally lacking and felt I had something to add to the conversation. Nothing more, nothing less.
  - anthonygd 6y ago
    Everyone thinks their thoughts are their own. Most people are wrong. That's the nature of being social creatures.
    - arp242 6y ago
      Sure, I guess. But that is not the same as "being part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign".
recursivedoubts 6y ago
maybe people we find obnoxious should be able to have a life and job and opinions we don't like maybe being OK with that is part of being a mature adult
- qayxc 6y ago
  All that was granted to RMS, even to a degree most others don't. The problem with RMS (and way too many other public figures) is the inability to just keep their mouths shut every once in a while. Everyone - especially in the age of social media - would be much better off not sharing every personal opinion on every subject with the entire planet; lest they're willing and able to deal with the inevitable backlash.
  - recursivedoubts 6y ago
    maybe, rather, in the age of social media, we should all accept there are a lot of people out there who think, act and speak differently than we do this is hard, admittedly, but it seems like the right thing to me
    - qayxc 6y ago
      That's a nice ideal, but unachievable. Social norms exist because people in general are incapable of doing exactly that. It's not just "hard" - it's outright impossible. You're basically wishing for no one to ever be offended again for any reason. That's not human nature, though, so the best way to avoid unnecessary drama is to stick to the old "Talk is silver, silence is golden" as far as discussing controversial (off-)topics in public is concerned. Emphasis on 'in public' and 'off-topic', because that's what this is about. Might not be as important for the average Joe or Jane, but as soon as your name becomes entangled with the cause you fight for, it's a different story entirely.
      - recursivedoubts 6y ago
        This simply allows the most easily offended to set the norms of public discourse.
lettergram 6y ago
I think there’s a few important things to understand: 1. There probably wouldn’t be free or open software if not for Stallman. We could argue it was inevitable, but frankly, Linux (the OS) wouldn’t have been built when it was without his efforts. At the time of gcc development, even compilers were big money. 2. Stallman is definitely on the autism spectrum. Nothing wrong with that, but one of the primary indicators are social issue. It’s not at all surprising he’s rigid, pedantic, etc. having met and organized event(s) with Stallman, he’s definitely a character, but I’ve never really seen him be outright mean. Simply put, he can be off putting, not politically correct and argumentative, but that’s kinda his baggage. 3. Free and Open source are definitely not the same thing. As we have seen from Amazon jacking peoples work and not giving back. Exactly what Stallman argued would happen has burned a large part of the open source community. Not saying there’s not a lot of good, but the concern was definitely warranted
- jgtrosh 6y ago
  I agree with you on these points. But they don't affect this letter's main point.
  - jmclnx 6y ago
    I too agree, but I think there is a hidden "fight" going on. I believe RMS is the only person around that can prevent a full corporate take over of Linux. All ready people are creating non-GPL tools in hopes of replacing their GPL cousins. And in most cases, one cannot use Linux on many devices without using closed source blobs. Right now it "seems" these blobs do not impact user privacy, but what is to stop these blobs from phoning home in the future. Unless someone steps up to continue RMS FSF policies, he is very much needed.
    - jasonpeacock 6y ago
      > I believe RMS is the only person around that can prevent a full corporate take over of Linux. How? What has he actually done - what have been his successes? What can he do? He can't stop companies from writing software. He's a champion of GPLv3, which companies are already avoiding like the plague and is driving them to development alternative SW to replace the GPLv3 tools.
muglug 6y ago
TL;DR the author of this article still thinks Stallman needs to resign, and that the FSF made the wrong decision in re-appointing him.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  We all know that many people have both opinions - what matters is the content of the opinion. If all you're interested in is whether an author falls on X or Y side of some touchy decision, you're doing yourself a disservice (and doing others a disservice by implying they too should only care about that).
kome 6y ago
I find amusing that the circles that are verbally more open to neuro-diversity are also the ones that stigmatize Stallman more, considering him, "poor choice for a leadership". Yes, strange people say socially uncomfortable stuff and behave weirdly. Often they say stuff that is not socially acceptable. We can manage this, I hope. Especially considering his real contribution to changing computing as we know it.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  somebody autistic shouldn't be in a leadership position managing people. that's not what they're good at. it's like putting somebody with dementia in a chess-tournament and then complaining that "the game is rigged".
  - sildur 6y ago
    This autistic had successfully led the free software movement for more than three decades. So maybe he's more fit for the position than a PR spewing drone.
    - DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
      where has it taken the free software movement? nobody cares about Hurd or GNU these days because the ones getting the applause are FAANG, but not the thousands of small (or big) maintainers doing the actual work. can you picture him as the head of a company like Nokia, CISCO, an insurance company, bank or literally any other thing outside the raggedy FSF? He would have not survived past day #1 because public perception matters in power. I wouldn't applaud the FSF as an organization too much considering how well it has served the majority of people doing the legwork nor even as a "movement".
  - moistbar 6y ago
    Judging from where free software has gotten, I'd say he's quite good at what he does.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
AllegedAlec 6y ago
> Luckily, the backlash against this has been significant, including an An open letter to remove Richard M. Stallman from all leadership positions. "Arrest this man, he talks in maths" If you think someone needs to be cancelled because you think they're 'creepy and obnoxious': grow the fuck up.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  Is that the only reason? Is being creepy and obnoxious enough to reasonably be fired from certain kinds of positions? Is being fired from any position an act of cancellation? You're telling people to "grow the fuck up", but you're not being very mature in your exploration of the question.
  - mumblemumble 6y ago
    > Is being fired from any position an act of cancellation? My own suspicion is that "cancellation" doesn't describe the act itself, so much as the person it happens to. The general trend seems to be that, if it's someone from relatively higher on the social power scale losing a position or status due to poor behavior, it's cancellation. If it's someone from relatively lower on the social power scale, it's just the same old, run-of-the-mill social consequences that have existed since time immemorial.
AlgorithmicTime 6y ago
Stallman is a weird-ass creepy autistic motherfucker who has, despite all that, has managed to create the Free Software movement, which is a massive achievement. Indeed, it's unlikely that FLOSS would exist at all without Stallman and his unique brand of intransigent principled autism. Not to mention, everytime some crazy shit happens in the world of software, we all look back at his past writings and go, "Oh, Stallman was right. Again." Is he weird, creepy, offputting, totally socially clueless, and massively unattractive? Yes. Is he exactly the man to lead the Free Software Foundation? Also yes.
asddubs 6y ago
>My new idea is that the install fest could allow the devil to hang around, off in a corner of the hall, or the next room. (Actually, a human being wearing sign saying “The Devil,” and maybe a toy mask or horns.) The devil would offer to install nonfree drivers in the user’s machine to make more parts of the computer function, explaining to the user that the cost of this is using a nonfree (unjust) program. I'll disagree that this is "cringe" (which is a word that I hate, unrelatedly), it's actually pretty funny and probably a good way to communicate their message while still conceding the compromise, in my opinion. But that's mostly a small disagreement and obviously not the main point of the article
- arp242 6y ago
  I actually don't really like the word either, but I don't really know of a good alternative.
mik09 6y ago
i was so shocked when i found the open letter project trending on top of the github chart. i have a feeling that stallman promotes other stuff that many people don't really like, and they managed to cherry pick one thing about marvin minsky and focus all the fire on that. rms is some sort of bernie sanders with a technological brain. like aaron schwartz, he's pragmatic, and that is dangerous. frankly, i just won't trust anything trending now as aaron schwartz's name was taken from the list of founders of reddit recently and reddit has gone... well there are threads and forums about that too.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
rozab 6y ago
While this is a good article, it does omit Stallman's opinions about age of consent, which is a huge sticking point for many people.
- eimrine 6y ago
  Any age of consent discussion is nonsense after all great things he did. He can have any opinion he considers wise and if somebody disagrees this disagreement has nothing to do with Free Software idea. Who knows, maybe after 100 years Stallman's point of view about consent will became common.
- arp242 6y ago
  I am aware of them, but it wasn't mentioned in the letter this is a response to. I feel those comments were also a little bit more nuanced than some people have taken them. I've seen people describe him as a "paedophile apologist" and "rape apologist", which like some of the other terms like "transphobia" etc. also seem to be a few steps too far.
kstenerud 6y ago
> Stallman is not exactly what I would call a shining example of the human race, and unsuitable for any sort of leadership position in particular But here's the thing: He DID become a leader, mostly because of his confrontational nature and strength of conviction (which is how most leaders for change do things - they step on lots of toes). He DID lead these organisations (rocky or not - doesn't matter) and they DID become a strong force in the software world. To call him unsuitable for a leadership position is just ignoring history and his ability to attract followers. You may not like him as a person. You may be creeped out by him. You may dislike a lot of what he says and does (and really, who doesn't?). But removal without due process flies in the face of everything that makes us civilised. The normal process is to issue warnings/rules with consequences, and then implement those consequences when they're ignored. This is how we do things fairly - a shot across the bow first. The alternative is mob rule and capricious, changing ex-post-facto justice, which has time and time again been demonstrated to never end well.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  He led, which is good. But does that mean he is the right person to lead the foundation now? I think the article makes a really good argument on why he isn't. His social awkwardness, his public opinion on contentious issues like abortion or what is considered rape, the fact that he makes people feel uncomfortable. These are distractions that push people away and weaken the foundation's focus on free software. He may be right on those issues, he might not be. Mob rule is bad, cancel culture is bad. His removal at the hands of such a cancel culture mob is probably part of why he is being put back in a leadership position. But I absolutely understand why people are puzzled by the board's move to bring him back.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
    > But does that mean he is the right person to lead the foundation now? This is one question. Another is: "Should the Twitter mob decide about it?
    - arp242 6y ago
DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
didn't click on it since the title already reveals the conclusion. I've met RMS in the 90ies on a FOSS / Linux conference and he should have never been there considering his lack of manners and social skills. He is such a strange human being that I ended up building him into my Tech-satire. I don't think he is any more or less creepy than hundreds of others socially awkward computer scientists that I met over the decades. The difference is he has a position of power which he should never have for hundreds of reasons (not alone that he isn't good at it). He is the type of person who if I'd employ him I'd value him and protect him by keeping him in an off-site basement lab where he wouldn't even be allowed to open the door for the pizza delivery. It's a huge problem when you're the public face of a movement and are also a mysogynyst. But this whole situation of wanting to cancel him speaks more about the FSF (who doesn't see a problem of bringing him back on to the board) and the other extremists ("blue haired social justice dweebs on twitter who hate him because they notice he is equally socially inept as them but has more power than them).
- winkeltripel 6y ago
  > also a mysogynyst (justifies rape and pedophilia) Didn't the article cited debunk that? Citation needed for that claim. He's very rigid and particular about language. He doesn't like the legal connection between age-of-consent and rape. He sees rape as this thing which MUST be forced, and MUST be violent. If it isn't both of those, it's not rape. He wants a different word for it, and a different charge. He can be very crude and inarticulate, but that opinion isn't invalid.
  - DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
    yeah sorry I had retracted the specifics in (brackets) for the reason you stated after not finding proper sources. apologies you were still left with the original version of my comment. I did meet him in person back in the day and we had dinner. I'm a lot younger than him still and was just breaking into programming back then. He treated most "less experienced" people on the table like shit including myself and the evening ended with me calling him out on various things and turning him into a joke where even the people who invited him couldn't help giggling (I used to work behind a bar as a kid and am pretty good at reducing somebody to rubble with humor if needed. so in a way I did to him what he did to others and he absolutely hated it.)
eimrine 6y ago
>“you should not be using hacker but cracker” Totally agree with RMS (and this word is not RMS' invention: http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/crackers.html http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/crackers.html ) Also I agree with "global heating" instead of "global warming" and almost all of his neologisms. >Stallman’s views in general on computing are stuck somewhere about 1990. You might think that compiler theory has advanced at least a little bit since the publication of the book of Dragon - but my opinion is that it is not. > The “GNU Operating System” (which does not exist, has never existed, and most likely will never exist[1]) How about emacs?
digitalsin 6y ago
Few of us are great, and few of us are the devil. RMS has contributed greatness to the world, even if, like me, you're not a huge fan of him personally. I appreciate all he has contributed and can also recognize he isn't perfect. All of the crybaby trolls have done zilch compared to RMS.

74 points by wchar_t 6y ago

Still argues for removing RMS, using a creative 'baity' title. Part of the general effort to get RMS removed, flagged for being part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign, nothing new here.

JBorrow 6y ago
Can you clarify why you think that makes the article deserve to be flagged? I see it as not spam; it’s a timely post about why a senior member of the open source community is not suitable for a leadership position that they have just taken up.
happytoexplain 6y ago
How is the title baity simply because you assumed it meant the author agreed with you? There is tons of room between "great" and "the devil", so I had no clue going in which side of the "should he be on the FSF board" line the author was on. Further, how is this "part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign"? It just seems like multiple people, again, have an opinion you don't agree with. That doesn't make it "concerted", with its nefarious undertones.
- the-dude 6y ago
  That is what seemingly means yes. What is your point again?
arp242 6y ago
> being part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign No, it's not. My thoughts are my own. I wrote it after reading through various discussions and feeling a more nuanced take was generally lacking and felt I had something to add to the conversation. Nothing more, nothing less.
- anthonygd 6y ago
  Everyone thinks their thoughts are their own. Most people are wrong. That's the nature of being social creatures.
  - arp242 6y ago
    Sure, I guess. But that is not the same as "being part of a seemingly concerted PR campaign".

recursivedoubts 6y ago

maybe people we find obnoxious should be able to have a life and job and opinions we don't like maybe being OK with that is part of being a mature adult

qayxc 6y ago
All that was granted to RMS, even to a degree most others don't. The problem with RMS (and way too many other public figures) is the inability to just keep their mouths shut every once in a while. Everyone - especially in the age of social media - would be much better off not sharing every personal opinion on every subject with the entire planet; lest they're willing and able to deal with the inevitable backlash.
- recursivedoubts 6y ago
  maybe, rather, in the age of social media, we should all accept there are a lot of people out there who think, act and speak differently than we do this is hard, admittedly, but it seems like the right thing to me
  - qayxc 6y ago
    That's a nice ideal, but unachievable. Social norms exist because people in general are incapable of doing exactly that. It's not just "hard" - it's outright impossible. You're basically wishing for no one to ever be offended again for any reason. That's not human nature, though, so the best way to avoid unnecessary drama is to stick to the old "Talk is silver, silence is golden" as far as discussing controversial (off-)topics in public is concerned. Emphasis on 'in public' and 'off-topic', because that's what this is about. Might not be as important for the average Joe or Jane, but as soon as your name becomes entangled with the cause you fight for, it's a different story entirely.
    - recursivedoubts 6y ago
      This simply allows the most easily offended to set the norms of public discourse.

lettergram 6y ago

I think there’s a few important things to understand: 1. There probably wouldn’t be free or open software if not for Stallman. We could argue it was inevitable, but frankly, Linux (the OS) wouldn’t have been built when it was without his efforts. At the time of gcc development, even compilers were big money. 2. Stallman is definitely on the autism spectrum. Nothing wrong with that, but one of the primary indicators are social issue. It’s not at all surprising he’s rigid, pedantic, etc. having met and organized event(s) with Stallman, he’s definitely a character, but I’ve never really seen him be outright mean. Simply put, he can be off putting, not politically correct and argumentative, but that’s kinda his baggage. 3. Free and Open source are definitely not the same thing. As we have seen from Amazon jacking peoples work and not giving back. Exactly what Stallman argued would happen has burned a large part of the open source community. Not saying there’s not a lot of good, but the concern was definitely warranted

jgtrosh 6y ago
I agree with you on these points. But they don't affect this letter's main point.
- jmclnx 6y ago
  I too agree, but I think there is a hidden "fight" going on. I believe RMS is the only person around that can prevent a full corporate take over of Linux. All ready people are creating non-GPL tools in hopes of replacing their GPL cousins. And in most cases, one cannot use Linux on many devices without using closed source blobs. Right now it "seems" these blobs do not impact user privacy, but what is to stop these blobs from phoning home in the future. Unless someone steps up to continue RMS FSF policies, he is very much needed.
  - jasonpeacock 6y ago
    > I believe RMS is the only person around that can prevent a full corporate take over of Linux. How? What has he actually done - what have been his successes? What can he do? He can't stop companies from writing software. He's a champion of GPLv3, which companies are already avoiding like the plague and is driving them to development alternative SW to replace the GPLv3 tools.

muglug 6y ago

TL;DR the author of this article still thinks Stallman needs to resign, and that the FSF made the wrong decision in re-appointing him.

happytoexplain 6y ago
We all know that many people have both opinions - what matters is the content of the opinion. If all you're interested in is whether an author falls on X or Y side of some touchy decision, you're doing yourself a disservice (and doing others a disservice by implying they too should only care about that).

kome 6y ago

I find amusing that the circles that are verbally more open to neuro-diversity are also the ones that stigmatize Stallman more, considering him, "poor choice for a leadership". Yes, strange people say socially uncomfortable stuff and behave weirdly. Often they say stuff that is not socially acceptable. We can manage this, I hope. Especially considering his real contribution to changing computing as we know it.

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
somebody autistic shouldn't be in a leadership position managing people. that's not what they're good at. it's like putting somebody with dementia in a chess-tournament and then complaining that "the game is rigged".
- sildur 6y ago
  This autistic had successfully led the free software movement for more than three decades. So maybe he's more fit for the position than a PR spewing drone.
  - DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
    where has it taken the free software movement? nobody cares about Hurd or GNU these days because the ones getting the applause are FAANG, but not the thousands of small (or big) maintainers doing the actual work. can you picture him as the head of a company like Nokia, CISCO, an insurance company, bank or literally any other thing outside the raggedy FSF? He would have not survived past day #1 because public perception matters in power. I wouldn't applaud the FSF as an organization too much considering how well it has served the majority of people doing the legwork nor even as a "movement".
- moistbar 6y ago
  Judging from where free software has gotten, I'd say he's quite good at what he does.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

AllegedAlec 6y ago

> Luckily, the backlash against this has been significant, including an An open letter to remove Richard M. Stallman from all leadership positions. "Arrest this man, he talks in maths" If you think someone needs to be cancelled because you think they're 'creepy and obnoxious': grow the fuck up.

happytoexplain 6y ago
Is that the only reason? Is being creepy and obnoxious enough to reasonably be fired from certain kinds of positions? Is being fired from any position an act of cancellation? You're telling people to "grow the fuck up", but you're not being very mature in your exploration of the question.
- mumblemumble 6y ago
  > Is being fired from any position an act of cancellation? My own suspicion is that "cancellation" doesn't describe the act itself, so much as the person it happens to. The general trend seems to be that, if it's someone from relatively higher on the social power scale losing a position or status due to poor behavior, it's cancellation. If it's someone from relatively lower on the social power scale, it's just the same old, run-of-the-mill social consequences that have existed since time immemorial.

AlgorithmicTime 6y ago

Stallman is a weird-ass creepy autistic motherfucker who has, despite all that, has managed to create the Free Software movement, which is a massive achievement. Indeed, it's unlikely that FLOSS would exist at all without Stallman and his unique brand of intransigent principled autism. Not to mention, everytime some crazy shit happens in the world of software, we all look back at his past writings and go, "Oh, Stallman was right. Again." Is he weird, creepy, offputting, totally socially clueless, and massively unattractive? Yes. Is he exactly the man to lead the Free Software Foundation? Also yes.

asddubs 6y ago

>My new idea is that the install fest could allow the devil to hang around, off in a corner of the hall, or the next room. (Actually, a human being wearing sign saying “The Devil,” and maybe a toy mask or horns.) The devil would offer to install nonfree drivers in the user’s machine to make more parts of the computer function, explaining to the user that the cost of this is using a nonfree (unjust) program. I'll disagree that this is "cringe" (which is a word that I hate, unrelatedly), it's actually pretty funny and probably a good way to communicate their message while still conceding the compromise, in my opinion. But that's mostly a small disagreement and obviously not the main point of the article

arp242 6y ago
I actually don't really like the word either, but I don't really know of a good alternative.

mik09 6y ago

i was so shocked when i found the open letter project trending on top of the github chart. i have a feeling that stallman promotes other stuff that many people don't really like, and they managed to cherry pick one thing about marvin minsky and focus all the fire on that. rms is some sort of bernie sanders with a technological brain. like aaron schwartz, he's pragmatic, and that is dangerous. frankly, i just won't trust anything trending now as aaron schwartz's name was taken from the list of founders of reddit recently and reddit has gone... well there are threads and forums about that too.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

rozab 6y ago

While this is a good article, it does omit Stallman's opinions about age of consent, which is a huge sticking point for many people.

eimrine 6y ago
Any age of consent discussion is nonsense after all great things he did. He can have any opinion he considers wise and if somebody disagrees this disagreement has nothing to do with Free Software idea. Who knows, maybe after 100 years Stallman's point of view about consent will became common.
arp242 6y ago
I am aware of them, but it wasn't mentioned in the letter this is a response to. I feel those comments were also a little bit more nuanced than some people have taken them. I've seen people describe him as a "paedophile apologist" and "rape apologist", which like some of the other terms like "transphobia" etc. also seem to be a few steps too far.

kstenerud 6y ago

> Stallman is not exactly what I would call a shining example of the human race, and unsuitable for any sort of leadership position in particular But here's the thing: He DID become a leader, mostly because of his confrontational nature and strength of conviction (which is how most leaders for change do things - they step on lots of toes). He DID lead these organisations (rocky or not - doesn't matter) and they DID become a strong force in the software world. To call him unsuitable for a leadership position is just ignoring history and his ability to attract followers. You may not like him as a person. You may be creeped out by him. You may dislike a lot of what he says and does (and really, who doesn't?). But removal without due process flies in the face of everything that makes us civilised. The normal process is to issue warnings/rules with consequences, and then implement those consequences when they're ignored. This is how we do things fairly - a shot across the bow first. The alternative is mob rule and capricious, changing ex-post-facto justice, which has time and time again been demonstrated to never end well.

TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
He led, which is good. But does that mean he is the right person to lead the foundation now? I think the article makes a really good argument on why he isn't. His social awkwardness, his public opinion on contentious issues like abortion or what is considered rape, the fact that he makes people feel uncomfortable. These are distractions that push people away and weaken the foundation's focus on free software. He may be right on those issues, he might not be. Mob rule is bad, cancel culture is bad. His removal at the hands of such a cancel culture mob is probably part of why he is being put back in a leadership position. But I absolutely understand why people are puzzled by the board's move to bring him back.
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
  > But does that mean he is the right person to lead the foundation now? This is one question. Another is: "Should the Twitter mob decide about it?
  - arp242 6y ago

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago

didn't click on it since the title already reveals the conclusion. I've met RMS in the 90ies on a FOSS / Linux conference and he should have never been there considering his lack of manners and social skills. He is such a strange human being that I ended up building him into my Tech-satire. I don't think he is any more or less creepy than hundreds of others socially awkward computer scientists that I met over the decades. The difference is he has a position of power which he should never have for hundreds of reasons (not alone that he isn't good at it). He is the type of person who if I'd employ him I'd value him and protect him by keeping him in an off-site basement lab where he wouldn't even be allowed to open the door for the pizza delivery. It's a huge problem when you're the public face of a movement and are also a mysogynyst. But this whole situation of wanting to cancel him speaks more about the FSF (who doesn't see a problem of bringing him back on to the board) and the other extremists ("blue haired social justice dweebs on twitter who hate him because they notice he is equally socially inept as them but has more power than them).

winkeltripel 6y ago
> also a mysogynyst (justifies rape and pedophilia) Didn't the article cited debunk that? Citation needed for that claim. He's very rigid and particular about language. He doesn't like the legal connection between age-of-consent and rape. He sees rape as this thing which MUST be forced, and MUST be violent. If it isn't both of those, it's not rape. He wants a different word for it, and a different charge. He can be very crude and inarticulate, but that opinion isn't invalid.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  yeah sorry I had retracted the specifics in (brackets) for the reason you stated after not finding proper sources. apologies you were still left with the original version of my comment. I did meet him in person back in the day and we had dinner. I'm a lot younger than him still and was just breaking into programming back then. He treated most "less experienced" people on the table like shit including myself and the evening ended with me calling him out on various things and turning him into a joke where even the people who invited him couldn't help giggling (I used to work behind a bar as a kid and am pretty good at reducing somebody to rubble with humor if needed. so in a way I did to him what he did to others and he absolutely hated it.)

eimrine 6y ago

>“you should not be using hacker but cracker” Totally agree with RMS (and this word is not RMS' invention: http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/crackers.html http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/crackers.html ) Also I agree with "global heating" instead of "global warming" and almost all of his neologisms. >Stallman’s views in general on computing are stuck somewhere about 1990. You might think that compiler theory has advanced at least a little bit since the publication of the book of Dragon - but my opinion is that it is not. > The “GNU Operating System” (which does not exist, has never existed, and most likely will never exist[1]) How about emacs?

digitalsin 6y ago

Few of us are great, and few of us are the devil. RMS has contributed greatness to the world, even if, like me, you're not a huge fan of him personally. I appreciate all he has contributed and can also recognize he isn't perfect. All of the crybaby trolls have done zilch compared to RMS.