7 ms·

> He has sincere regrets, especially at how anger toward him personally has negatively impacted the reputation and mission of FSF In my opinion, "I'm sorry you

> He has sincere regrets, especially at how anger toward him personally has negatively impacted the reputation and mission of FSF In my opinion, "I'm sorry you were offended enough to stop supporting me" is not a sincere apology. In fact this whole announcement is one big "I'm sorry you were offended" statement. It doesn't apologise for the problem, it "apologises" for not managing to sneak the announcements past people without them realising. Whether you support RMS or not, this is a poor statement from the FSF, and a poor statement from RMS, and speaks to why so many feel that the FSF no longer represent them.

newacct583 6y ago
Which is frustrating, because this really should be a circumstance where a genuinely sincere apology should be... acceptable. RMS isn't accused of trafficking here, after all. He jumped in to a heated discussion to defend Minsky (one of his heroes[1] who had been fingered as a john in the Epstein affair). And in the process he deployed a line of argument[2] that probably sounded reasonable to a spectrum personality working in an nearly-all-male tech environment but that REALLY grates to modern ears in a more cosmopolitan world. All that needed to happen was RMS coming out with something along the lines "I'm sorry. I let criticism of my hero cloud my judgement and found myself defending something that shouldn't ever be defended. I should have known better, and know now how much rhetoric like this hurts people. Please forgive me." And that really should have been enough for a community consensus to form around forgiveness. This isn't a Bill Cosby situation, at all. But... I guess he wouldn't. And the FSF couldn't or didn't want to make him. Which is deeply frustrating. [1] And mine, FWIW. [2] To wit: "Engaging with extremely young, presumptively-trafficked prostitutes isn't TECHNICALLY assault". It's... logically arguable, but in context it ends up defending a practice we've all finally decided to abhor.
- danpalmer 6y ago
  I agree in principle. I think someone in RMS's postition could have apologised far better and been more effective at changing their behaviour. However I'm not sure that RMS himself could do this and at this point I think it's probably too late for the FSF to get him back without backlash because it has gone too far.
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  Honestly, the fact that a quick apology would have solved this entire problem is the main reason why I think he should go away. The entire situation reeks of extremely poor judgement on his part and the FSF's board, and to my eye seems emblematic of the poor leadership that he and the board have displayed for most of my lifetime. Or more succinctly; if you manage to turn a minor snafu worthy of one apology into a massive scandal that's splitting up your org, maybe you shouldn't be in charge?
  - seoaeu 6y ago
    Yeah, when your role has a large public relations component, botching things this badly really undermines undermines the argument that you're the best person for the job.
- throwaway8581 6y ago
  Who cares what he thinks about Minsky paying for sex? It’s hard to imagine something less relevant to his job.
  - danpalmer 6y ago
    I think people care more about the child sex trafficking than the paying for sex. Also your job doesn't have to be about child safety for it to be an issue if you excuse child sex trafficking.
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    His job is entirely ideological, so his ideology receives due scrutiny, even if this were an entirely unrelated field. But, given that Minsky is a significant name in the compiter science communities, and that Stallman continues to deny that Minsky's behavior (having sex with a 17 year-old unwilling sex worker while he was 70? 80?, even though he may have thought she was an 18-year old willinh sex worker) is not emtorely unrelated to questions of women's treatment in the computer science and opem source community.
    - guenthert 6y ago
      When did you stop beating your wife? Minsky did not have sex with an underage sex worker. Allegedly Epstein directed that woman to offer sex to Minsky, but that didn't occur. It is mind boggling how readily some people throw mud here.
      - newacct583 6y ago
        We don't know that it didn't happen either. My understanding is that the relevant section of the deposition in question (which was part of a civil suit, not a criminal matter) is redacted. The unredacted contents were reported via a leak to a journalist. And it's not clear if Giuffre was even asked if sex occurred, as it wasn't relevant to this particular suit and the attorneys present weren't law enforcement or prosecutors with a mandate to chase the kind of evidence. A reasonable guess is that Minsky probably did have sex, he just wasn't ever actually accused by anyone (being dead by the time this blew up). Could that be wrong? Sure. But jumping in to argue that the absence of evidence proves innocence while failing to recognize the gravity of the crime involved is EXACTLY the rake that RMS stepped on.
- luke2m 6y ago
  Exactly.
crazypython 6y ago
https://stallmansupport.org/ https://stallmansupport.org/
- danpalmer 6y ago
  This website does not acknowledge the harm he has done to the free software movement and therefore cannot heal any issues that he has caused. If he made a sincere apology things might be different, but as long as he and his supporters refuse to engage with criticism they won't reach a resolution.
  - brobdingnagians 6y ago
    Engaging with criticism is different than bowing to pressure (and I think he is engaging, just not in the way his detractors want). You can be nice, but you still have to stand strong on your principles. I don't like a lot of the stuff RMS says and think a lot of it is downright disgraceful, and I'm mostly indifferent to his cause, but I think he has a right to disagree with his detractors. I'd rather defend the rights of the people I disagree with, than to wake up one day without rights myself.
    - danpalmer 6y ago
      I see your point, although I'd suggest that there's a difference between changing the conversation and ignoring the conversation. I think RMS is ignoring the claims of toxic behaviour and/or claiming them to be fake news, rather than, say, owning and apologising or showing why those claims are wrong.
      - brobdingnagians 6y ago
        Good point; I do agree it would be much better for him to do that.
      - pwdisswordfish8 6y ago
        This is a statement by the board. RMS's own statement (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26780192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26780192) looks like it does what you say you want to see.
NaturalPhallacy 6y ago
Am I the only one who simply doesn't care? The purpose of the FSF isn't protecting children. It's the promotion of free software. Some tone-deaf words by RMS are only even relevant because of the prevalence of cancel culture and the cult of wokeism. Software will still need to be free after the fad cult of wokeism has been left behind. What the media claimed was Stallman defended Epstein. That isn't true. The whole thing should be a non-story. Ideological movements like free software require uncompromising people like RMS in it because it's an ideology. If the ideology of free software bows to people who aren't even involved in software then it will bow to anyone and thus serves no one. People's feelings don't make software and they certainly don't make it free. RMS is an icon in a field that is still brand new, letting this fad of woke cultism cancel him would be a tragedy would rightfully look back on I think as foolish as the chemical castration of Alan Turing for being gay. So what if RMS hurts the feelings of fragile people? He's done more good for software than most people ever will. This whole thing is a storm in a teacup and people getting upset about it are clearly seeking to be offended. And people who seek to be offended always succeed. So taking their offense seriously is literally a waste of time. The purpose of the FSF is free software. Not people's feelings. That they even acknowledged this storm in a teacup is disappointing. It's not their job.
- horsawlarway 6y ago
  Nope - I'm right there with you. This creeping worldview where everything is black and white is starting to get very annoying. Personally - I'm not an infant and I can recognize that nearly every person (actually - every person) I interact with on a daily basis holds viewpoints that I would agree with, and viewpoints that I would disagree with. There is no paragon of virtue, and there is no paragon of evil. Everyone will do good and bad (and god help you if you try to get us all to agree which is which). I still somehow manage to interact productively with most folks. People who fixate on this type of social judgement are mentally unwell.
- danpalmer 6y ago
  The point isn't that the FSF should have a political stance on topics outside of free software, the point is that to do their best job of promoting the free software movement they need to create an inclusive organisation that runs safe events, otherwise most people won't want to join, go to their events, or invite their representatives to give talks. Unfortunately this point is very easy to miss for those of us who are not typically discriminated against, excluded, or made to feel unwelcome. I'll guess from your inappropriate username that you're a guy, maybe you should read some of what women have said about working with RMS? I wonder how much better the FSF would be if he hadn't systematically made certain groups feel unwelcome? I have my own feelings about all sorts of political issues, and I don't expect those to always align with organisations such as the FSF. I do however expect to not shoot themselves in the foot when it comes to getting their message out.
mariusor 6y ago
> In my opinion, "I'm sorry you were offended enough to stop supporting me" is not a sincere apology. I'm surprised at the lack of empathy towards what seems a pretty genuine attempt at introspection. To me it seems obvious that RMS is a person with a handicap and deserves at least a little understanding and support, especially since he is openly acknowledging his difference.
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  He always said he was different. His statement doesn't evince any new understanding. He portrays himself as willing to learn. People who worked with him have different stories.[1] [1] http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html
  - mariusor 6y ago
    This is a pretty callous and uncharitable dismissal of rms' message. Everybody can better themselves despite what their peers might believe.
    - pseudalopex 6y ago
      His peers don't say he can't better himself. They say he resists it extraordinarily strongly. Feeling more empathy for people who deal with him isn't callous.
_nalply 6y ago
I am not supporting RMS. However after what I have read from him and FSF I just accept what they say. Because I try understand what happened and not to be distracted by outrage. After all outrage is just words. I think: - RMS did or said something neurotypical people tend to avoid. - There was no malice in what RMS did or said. - People either don't understand, have a beef with RMS, or are riding the bandwagon of outrage and cancel culture. I have family members on the spectrum so I understand that people are often clumsy, boneheaded and annoying, and so is RMS. I also learned that narcisstic people like to exploit the ineptitude of people on the spectrum. One way is to raise a ruckus about something unimportant but exploitable to raise outrage. Please suck it up as a mistake and forgive them. And! It's not about the real evil wrongdoings of certain other people!

newacct583 6y ago

Which is frustrating, because this really should be a circumstance where a genuinely sincere apology should be... acceptable. RMS isn't accused of trafficking here, after all. He jumped in to a heated discussion to defend Minsky (one of his heroes[1] who had been fingered as a john in the Epstein affair). And in the process he deployed a line of argument[2] that probably sounded reasonable to a spectrum personality working in an nearly-all-male tech environment but that REALLY grates to modern ears in a more cosmopolitan world. All that needed to happen was RMS coming out with something along the lines "I'm sorry. I let criticism of my hero cloud my judgement and found myself defending something that shouldn't ever be defended. I should have known better, and know now how much rhetoric like this hurts people. Please forgive me." And that really should have been enough for a community consensus to form around forgiveness. This isn't a Bill Cosby situation, at all. But... I guess he wouldn't. And the FSF couldn't or didn't want to make him. Which is deeply frustrating. [1] And mine, FWIW. [2] To wit: "Engaging with extremely young, presumptively-trafficked prostitutes isn't TECHNICALLY assault". It's... logically arguable, but in context it ends up defending a practice we've all finally decided to abhor.

danpalmer 6y ago
I agree in principle. I think someone in RMS's postition could have apologised far better and been more effective at changing their behaviour. However I'm not sure that RMS himself could do this and at this point I think it's probably too late for the FSF to get him back without backlash because it has gone too far.
ashtonkem 6y ago
Honestly, the fact that a quick apology would have solved this entire problem is the main reason why I think he should go away. The entire situation reeks of extremely poor judgement on his part and the FSF's board, and to my eye seems emblematic of the poor leadership that he and the board have displayed for most of my lifetime. Or more succinctly; if you manage to turn a minor snafu worthy of one apology into a massive scandal that's splitting up your org, maybe you shouldn't be in charge?
- seoaeu 6y ago
  Yeah, when your role has a large public relations component, botching things this badly really undermines undermines the argument that you're the best person for the job.
throwaway8581 6y ago
Who cares what he thinks about Minsky paying for sex? It’s hard to imagine something less relevant to his job.
- danpalmer 6y ago
  I think people care more about the child sex trafficking than the paying for sex. Also your job doesn't have to be about child safety for it to be an issue if you excuse child sex trafficking.
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  His job is entirely ideological, so his ideology receives due scrutiny, even if this were an entirely unrelated field. But, given that Minsky is a significant name in the compiter science communities, and that Stallman continues to deny that Minsky's behavior (having sex with a 17 year-old unwilling sex worker while he was 70? 80?, even though he may have thought she was an 18-year old willinh sex worker) is not emtorely unrelated to questions of women's treatment in the computer science and opem source community.
  - guenthert 6y ago
    When did you stop beating your wife? Minsky did not have sex with an underage sex worker. Allegedly Epstein directed that woman to offer sex to Minsky, but that didn't occur. It is mind boggling how readily some people throw mud here.
    - newacct583 6y ago
      We don't know that it didn't happen either. My understanding is that the relevant section of the deposition in question (which was part of a civil suit, not a criminal matter) is redacted. The unredacted contents were reported via a leak to a journalist. And it's not clear if Giuffre was even asked if sex occurred, as it wasn't relevant to this particular suit and the attorneys present weren't law enforcement or prosecutors with a mandate to chase the kind of evidence. A reasonable guess is that Minsky probably did have sex, he just wasn't ever actually accused by anyone (being dead by the time this blew up). Could that be wrong? Sure. But jumping in to argue that the absence of evidence proves innocence while failing to recognize the gravity of the crime involved is EXACTLY the rake that RMS stepped on.
luke2m 6y ago
Exactly.

crazypython 6y ago

https://stallmansupport.org/ https://stallmansupport.org/

danpalmer 6y ago
This website does not acknowledge the harm he has done to the free software movement and therefore cannot heal any issues that he has caused. If he made a sincere apology things might be different, but as long as he and his supporters refuse to engage with criticism they won't reach a resolution.
- brobdingnagians 6y ago
  Engaging with criticism is different than bowing to pressure (and I think he is engaging, just not in the way his detractors want). You can be nice, but you still have to stand strong on your principles. I don't like a lot of the stuff RMS says and think a lot of it is downright disgraceful, and I'm mostly indifferent to his cause, but I think he has a right to disagree with his detractors. I'd rather defend the rights of the people I disagree with, than to wake up one day without rights myself.
  - danpalmer 6y ago
    I see your point, although I'd suggest that there's a difference between changing the conversation and ignoring the conversation. I think RMS is ignoring the claims of toxic behaviour and/or claiming them to be fake news, rather than, say, owning and apologising or showing why those claims are wrong.
    - brobdingnagians 6y ago
      Good point; I do agree it would be much better for him to do that.
    - pwdisswordfish8 6y ago
      This is a statement by the board. RMS's own statement (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26780192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26780192) looks like it does what you say you want to see.

NaturalPhallacy 6y ago

Am I the only one who simply doesn't care? The purpose of the FSF isn't protecting children. It's the promotion of free software. Some tone-deaf words by RMS are only even relevant because of the prevalence of cancel culture and the cult of wokeism. Software will still need to be free after the fad cult of wokeism has been left behind. What the media claimed was Stallman defended Epstein. That isn't true. The whole thing should be a non-story. Ideological movements like free software require uncompromising people like RMS in it because it's an ideology. If the ideology of free software bows to people who aren't even involved in software then it will bow to anyone and thus serves no one. People's feelings don't make software and they certainly don't make it free. RMS is an icon in a field that is still brand new, letting this fad of woke cultism cancel him would be a tragedy would rightfully look back on I think as foolish as the chemical castration of Alan Turing for being gay. So what if RMS hurts the feelings of fragile people? He's done more good for software than most people ever will. This whole thing is a storm in a teacup and people getting upset about it are clearly seeking to be offended. And people who seek to be offended always succeed. So taking their offense seriously is literally a waste of time. The purpose of the FSF is free software. Not people's feelings. That they even acknowledged this storm in a teacup is disappointing. It's not their job.

horsawlarway 6y ago
Nope - I'm right there with you. This creeping worldview where everything is black and white is starting to get very annoying. Personally - I'm not an infant and I can recognize that nearly every person (actually - every person) I interact with on a daily basis holds viewpoints that I would agree with, and viewpoints that I would disagree with. There is no paragon of virtue, and there is no paragon of evil. Everyone will do good and bad (and god help you if you try to get us all to agree which is which). I still somehow manage to interact productively with most folks. People who fixate on this type of social judgement are mentally unwell.
danpalmer 6y ago
The point isn't that the FSF should have a political stance on topics outside of free software, the point is that to do their best job of promoting the free software movement they need to create an inclusive organisation that runs safe events, otherwise most people won't want to join, go to their events, or invite their representatives to give talks. Unfortunately this point is very easy to miss for those of us who are not typically discriminated against, excluded, or made to feel unwelcome. I'll guess from your inappropriate username that you're a guy, maybe you should read some of what women have said about working with RMS? I wonder how much better the FSF would be if he hadn't systematically made certain groups feel unwelcome? I have my own feelings about all sorts of political issues, and I don't expect those to always align with organisations such as the FSF. I do however expect to not shoot themselves in the foot when it comes to getting their message out.

mariusor 6y ago

> In my opinion, "I'm sorry you were offended enough to stop supporting me" is not a sincere apology. I'm surprised at the lack of empathy towards what seems a pretty genuine attempt at introspection. To me it seems obvious that RMS is a person with a handicap and deserves at least a little understanding and support, especially since he is openly acknowledging his difference.

pseudalopex 6y ago
He always said he was different. His statement doesn't evince any new understanding. He portrays himself as willing to learn. People who worked with him have different stories.[1] [1] http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html
- mariusor 6y ago
  This is a pretty callous and uncharitable dismissal of rms' message. Everybody can better themselves despite what their peers might believe.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    His peers don't say he can't better himself. They say he resists it extraordinarily strongly. Feeling more empathy for people who deal with him isn't callous.

_nalply 6y ago

I am not supporting RMS. However after what I have read from him and FSF I just accept what they say. Because I try understand what happened and not to be distracted by outrage. After all outrage is just words. I think: - RMS did or said something neurotypical people tend to avoid. - There was no malice in what RMS did or said. - People either don't understand, have a beef with RMS, or are riding the bandwagon of outrage and cancel culture. I have family members on the spectrum so I understand that people are often clumsy, boneheaded and annoying, and so is RMS. I also learned that narcisstic people like to exploit the ineptitude of people on the spectrum. One way is to raise a ruckus about something unimportant but exploitable to raise outrage. Please suck it up as a mistake and forgive them. And! It's not about the real evil wrongdoings of certain other people!