5 ms·

Any article that just dismisses the issues with Stallman as a smear and tells you not to listen to them without showing why they are wrong instantly seems to ha

by Latty 6y ago

Any article that just dismisses the issues with Stallman as a smear and tells you not to listen to them without showing why they are wrong instantly seems to have little intent to engage on the facts. This reads like an absurd conspiracy theory. Stallman had some good ideas about software, it doesn't mean he doesn't have bad ideas about other things (like consent), and if so we should continue to pursue the good ideas and throw out the bad. No individual is FOSS software, and equating the two is foolish at best.

jstanley 6y ago
> it doesn't mean he doesn't have bad ideas about other things (like consent) But does he have bad ideas about things like consent?
- Latty 6y ago
  Well, my point was that this article actively avoids answering that question. From what I can see, yes, he does. He seems to take the position that children should be able consent to sex with adults, which fundamentally makes contributors less safe, and in my opinion is worthy of removing him from positions of leadership. His comments (from https://web.archive.org/web/20210325013844/https://stallman.org/archives/2017-sep-dec.html#13_November_2017_(Jelani_Maraj) https://web.archive.org/web/20210325013844/https://stallman.... ): > Due to the vagueness of the term "sexual assault" together with the dishonest law that labels sex with adolescents as "rape" even if they are willing, we cannot tell from this article what sort of acts Maraj was found to have committed. So we can't begin to judge whether those acts were wrong. > I see at least three possibilities. Perhaps those acts really constituted rape — it is a possibility. Or perhaps the two had sex willingly, but her parents freaked out and demanded prosecution. Or, intermediate between those two, perhaps he pressured her into having sex, or got her drunk. It is fundamentally dangerous to offer abusers the opportunity to claim it was all willing, which is why the law makes it always rape. If you choose to break that law, that's on you and you deserve to be treated as an abuser. This position of regarding the ability to sleep with under-aged people as more important than defending under-aged people from abusers is one incompatible with keeping a community safe, in my opinion.
  - jaywalk 6y ago
    > fundamentally makes contributors less safe Please explain the actual link between contributing to free software and sex with minors.
    - Latty 6y ago
      I contributed to plenty of open source projects as a minor, interacting with maintainers and other people in the communities around them. Grooming and abuse is a real problem. If Stallman thinks it can be justified to sleep with a child if consent is given, then he wouldn't act to defend a child in that situation if they were being preyed upon unless it was clear to him it was abuse. That's not good enough. There should be no wiggle room because abusers can abuse that. That's why these laws exist, and that is the standard we should hold projects to, to allow children to safely contribute.
      - jaywalk 6y ago
        Why would Stallman, personally, be in a position where he's the only one who can defend a child in that situation? Your hypothetical doesn't make any sense.
        Latty 6y ago
        The "only one"? It doesn't matter if other people might do the right thing, if he doesn't, he shouldn't hold the position. If someone reads this, it makes them think they won't be taken seriously when they come forward if they are abused. That both makes them less likely to do so if they are abused, and less likely to even start engaging with the community. If they do come forward, Stallman has indicated he may not take them seriously. Given that he's arguing about this with others in leadership positions, even more than that he might pressure others to do so as well. Everyone in one of those positions should be taking such an allegation seriously, and if they don't, they shouldn't hold that position.
    - sh1989 6y ago
      I wrote a proper response to this, then deleted it. Because seriously, you're asking why a clear demonstration of how someone doesn't understand/is ignorant of power dynamics isn't a sign that person shouldn't be anywhere near positions of power and influence? And maybe the explaining that needs to be done is yourself.
koonsolo 6y ago
Show me the text where he has a bad idea about consent. And then show me how his statements are false. I guess you refer to this text: On MIT's internal Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) listerv, Stallman had seen the description of a protest of Marvin Minsky which said Minsky was "accused of assaulting" one of Epstein's victims. Stallman argued that "the most plausible scenario" is that "she presented herself to him as entirely willing" -- even if she was coerced by Epstein into doing so -- whereas the phrase "assaulting" implies the use of force or violence, faciliating what he calls "accusation inflation... Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the criticism." So please explain to me how this statement is false.
- Latty 6y ago
  My point was that this article makes no attempt to address those issues. However, I do happen to believe there is an issue, as I outlined in a sibling comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26646676 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26646676). Statutory rape law is a trade-off because proving sexual assault is hard and we value protecting children from abusers more than we value letting people sleep with children. If you disagree with that, yes, I believe you are not suitable to hold a leadership position at any organisation that needs to protect it's contributors, some of whom will be children.
  - koonsolo 6y ago
    First of all a "child" is defined as the age between birth and puberty, so you might want to update your own usage of that word. Secondly, the bigger part of the world seems to agree nowadays that 16 seems to be a reasonable age of consent. US is very conservative in this regards, depending on the state. So basically it's OK that a 50 year old has sex with a 16 year old in 1 state, but when you cross the state border, two 17 year olds having sex is illegal. So you claim that a person pointing out these absurdities should not be allowed in a leadership position?
    - Latty 6y ago

by Latty 6y ago

jstanley 6y ago

> it doesn't mean he doesn't have bad ideas about other things (like consent) But does he have bad ideas about things like consent?

Latty 6y ago
Well, my point was that this article actively avoids answering that question. From what I can see, yes, he does. He seems to take the position that children should be able consent to sex with adults, which fundamentally makes contributors less safe, and in my opinion is worthy of removing him from positions of leadership. His comments (from https://web.archive.org/web/20210325013844/https://stallman.org/archives/2017-sep-dec.html#13_November_2017_(Jelani_Maraj) https://web.archive.org/web/20210325013844/https://stallman.... ): > Due to the vagueness of the term "sexual assault" together with the dishonest law that labels sex with adolescents as "rape" even if they are willing, we cannot tell from this article what sort of acts Maraj was found to have committed. So we can't begin to judge whether those acts were wrong. > I see at least three possibilities. Perhaps those acts really constituted rape — it is a possibility. Or perhaps the two had sex willingly, but her parents freaked out and demanded prosecution. Or, intermediate between those two, perhaps he pressured her into having sex, or got her drunk. It is fundamentally dangerous to offer abusers the opportunity to claim it was all willing, which is why the law makes it always rape. If you choose to break that law, that's on you and you deserve to be treated as an abuser. This position of regarding the ability to sleep with under-aged people as more important than defending under-aged people from abusers is one incompatible with keeping a community safe, in my opinion.
- jaywalk 6y ago
  > fundamentally makes contributors less safe Please explain the actual link between contributing to free software and sex with minors.
  - Latty 6y ago
    I contributed to plenty of open source projects as a minor, interacting with maintainers and other people in the communities around them. Grooming and abuse is a real problem. If Stallman thinks it can be justified to sleep with a child if consent is given, then he wouldn't act to defend a child in that situation if they were being preyed upon unless it was clear to him it was abuse. That's not good enough. There should be no wiggle room because abusers can abuse that. That's why these laws exist, and that is the standard we should hold projects to, to allow children to safely contribute.
    - jaywalk 6y ago
      Why would Stallman, personally, be in a position where he's the only one who can defend a child in that situation? Your hypothetical doesn't make any sense.
      - Latty 6y ago
        The "only one"? It doesn't matter if other people might do the right thing, if he doesn't, he shouldn't hold the position. If someone reads this, it makes them think they won't be taken seriously when they come forward if they are abused. That both makes them less likely to do so if they are abused, and less likely to even start engaging with the community. If they do come forward, Stallman has indicated he may not take them seriously. Given that he's arguing about this with others in leadership positions, even more than that he might pressure others to do so as well. Everyone in one of those positions should be taking such an allegation seriously, and if they don't, they shouldn't hold that position.
  - sh1989 6y ago
    I wrote a proper response to this, then deleted it. Because seriously, you're asking why a clear demonstration of how someone doesn't understand/is ignorant of power dynamics isn't a sign that person shouldn't be anywhere near positions of power and influence? And maybe the explaining that needs to be done is yourself.

koonsolo 6y ago

Show me the text where he has a bad idea about consent. And then show me how his statements are false. I guess you refer to this text: On MIT's internal Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) listerv, Stallman had seen the description of a protest of Marvin Minsky which said Minsky was "accused of assaulting" one of Epstein's victims. Stallman argued that "the most plausible scenario" is that "she presented herself to him as entirely willing" -- even if she was coerced by Epstein into doing so -- whereas the phrase "assaulting" implies the use of force or violence, faciliating what he calls "accusation inflation... Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the criticism." So please explain to me how this statement is false.

Latty 6y ago
My point was that this article makes no attempt to address those issues. However, I do happen to believe there is an issue, as I outlined in a sibling comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26646676 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26646676). Statutory rape law is a trade-off because proving sexual assault is hard and we value protecting children from abusers more than we value letting people sleep with children. If you disagree with that, yes, I believe you are not suitable to hold a leadership position at any organisation that needs to protect it's contributors, some of whom will be children.
- koonsolo 6y ago
  First of all a "child" is defined as the age between birth and puberty, so you might want to update your own usage of that word. Secondly, the bigger part of the world seems to agree nowadays that 16 seems to be a reasonable age of consent. US is very conservative in this regards, depending on the state. So basically it's OK that a 50 year old has sex with a 16 year old in 1 state, but when you cross the state border, two 17 year olds having sex is illegal. So you claim that a person pointing out these absurdities should not be allowed in a leadership position?
  - Latty 6y ago