3 ms·
That Stallman is the bottleneck. He’s too controversial. In September 2006, Stallman wrote, "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms chil
by godzillabrennus 3y ago
That Stallman is the bottleneck. He’s too controversial.
In September 2006, Stallman wrote, "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing." In 2019, after conversations with victims, he changed his opinion that it does cause harm.
- lynx23 3y agoHow is this relevant to FLOSS or the FSF?
- gettodachoppa 3y agoSo a hippie boomer held some hippie boomer belief, then after speaking to people affected by it, he realized he was wrong and changed his mind. And this is a problem because? I'm more likely to donate to the FSF than to any of those bland, soulless American "we hecking love corpo-FOSS" HR drones like the OSI and the other vultures who tried to take him out a couple of years back. If Stallman is replaced by a fake corpo-drone, I'd never donate, just as I stopped for Mozilla.
- pahbloo 3y agoEven ignoring opinions not related to software, Stallman is still controversial; he's a radical advocate for software freedom. And FSF is a radical organization, too. People and institutions with radical positions are unlikely to achieve mainstream acceptance. But, radical positions are a needed influence in the ecosystem, helping to keep the balance. So, I think that after all FSF is a succesfull organization.