7 ms·

Here he is, 70, under chemo, giving a speech. He keeps being a force of nature. May he recover well, or at least have long enjoyable years ahead. He has/had a

by jraph 3y ago

Here he is, 70, under chemo, giving a speech. He keeps being a force of nature. May he recover well, or at least have long enjoyable years ahead. He has/had arguable/unacceptable behavior, but I believe we strongly owe him. He has built incredible software, defined important stuff and kicked our asses in the right direction.

PlutoIsAPlanet 3y ago
He's also been the victim of some pretty vile smear campaigns and is still going on. I know if I was the target of the crap he got, I wouldn't want to continue doing anything anymore.
- op00to 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - oblio 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - jonahbenton 3y ago
      Knew him a long time ago. It's a very different thing not understanding what other people are, compared to bearing them ill will. Definitely interactively incompetent, but doesn't carry ill will.
    - tokai 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - oblio 3y ago
        > Like clockwork. Doesn't make me wrong, even if you personally want to look the other way. Also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37702077 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37702077
      - joenot443 3y ago
        It's exhausting, isn't it? Moralizers will come for anyone and everything. Tearing down the world, one individual at a time, until finally, after enough characters have been destroyed and enough personalities beaten down, we'll all happily exist in a world where no one's behavior will ever offend. We can all rest easy knowing that we won, that the _____ists of the world have been banished, and finally egalitarianism will prevail. For those in this thread chomping at the bit to attack a dying 70yo's character, did I do your cause justice?
      - mustacheemperor 3y ago
        Like clockwork, women in tech continue to beg for our community to hold a reasonable standard for how half the humans on earth should be treated when they choose to work in this industry. Woohoo RS and thank you for your contributions. But one of those contributions is being a living example of how brilliant and highly valuable people in this field can still need to learn the basics on how to treat other people with respect. For the women he's mistreated, it's very unfortunate they had to play a role in that collective lesson. The least we can do is not ignore it or rationalize it away. On that note, I just don't appreciate or frankly understand the repeated insistence from some people that this is some kind of scheme, there is some kind of conspiracy to complain about successful contributors for mistreating the people around them. This take especially makes no sense to me when the mistreatment is well known and documented. Like, some of us don't want to be treated like shit! So we bring it up when the community lauds praise around someone who does! I don't think this is related to some personality complex held by RS' inferiors with a compulsion to tear down his achievements. Most of the time when I see these criticisms voiced, they are actually wrapped in a highly-polite package that includes heaps of praise besides.
    - op00to 3y ago
      I posted elsewhere in the thread he came to my university for a talk, and spent the time staring at women's chests.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - d_tr 3y ago
        Yeah you 're petty, we get it.
        oblio 3y ago
        > Yeah you 're petty, we get it. Really? Should OP just bask in Stallman's glory and not notice things that were bad etiquette even in the Victorian era? Stallman's done some amazing somethings, some average things and some repugnant things (including the field of software engineering/Free Software; see the Emacs and GCC forks, his maintanership of Emacs in the latter part of his time as main maintainer, etc).
        d_tr 3y ago
        > Should OP just bask in Stallman's glory and not notice things that were bad etiquette even in the Victorian era? No. But I 'm not sure whether you 've read OP's other comments in this topic (about Stallman's cancer), some of which are hidden due to downvotes.
    - jraph 3y ago
      I think there are two different things: - the MIT mailing list discussion of a few years ago where he got a lot of flakes for what I indeed believe was a lot of misunderstanding. He seemed reasonable to me, but you really need subtle and careful reading to notice this. It was easy to misread and understand the contrary of was he thinks. I think he should have refrained from participating in this discussion though. While I don't know if it was intentionally driven by opponents, I do think he was defamed a lot, regardless one's opinion on this story. - his inappropriate behavior with women, who mostly had to (find tricks to) avoid him, from was I read there and there. I don't think he is misogynistic (many examples on stallman.org supports the opposite) but I believe there's no excuse for this inappropriate behavior if true. He should have shown more respect and learned to avoid making people and women in particular uncomfortable. He is incredibly clever, I can't imagine he would be unable to learn what patterns to avoid, he should have bothered more. I know it's difficult in particular for some autistic people (which he might be) to take hints, but I also know some who became incredibly good at it after learning (better than non-autistic people even, precisely because it was a conscious process - not saying it's easy; it is exhausting for some people). And it does not require being able to take subtle hints to avoid obvious sexist behavior. I was thinking of this and the many times he was mean to someone when I mentioned "unacceptable" in my first comment.
      - op00to 3y ago
        When I hear stuff like "you need really subtle and careful reading"... it's just an excuse to discount the actual content of the message and invent the meaning you wanted all along. Like, how could I be so stupid to not pick up on this totally opposite point from what RMS was saying?
        jraph 3y ago
        This point was discussed at length over the years. You have your opinion on it. Likely different from mine. At this point I don't think any of us can change their mind, we both have been forming our respective opinion for a long time now. Let me precise my phrasing: you might have read this thing with "really subtle and careful reading" and reached a different opinion from mine. I believe it. It's fine. But I do maintain that, in any case, you need really subtle and careful reading to avoid jumping to widely wrong conclusions. I think it was easy to understand horrible things from his wording by skipping a word or two or thinking too fast. The thing with Stallman in particular is that he is particularly very careful with his wording, and I think this whole MIT discussion was no counterexample to this. It's up to us to understand the right thing and it is clear that strongly different interpretations emerged this time, for some reason. And what's worse is that his clarifications might have strengthened both interpretations. Anyway, that's why I said "Regardless on one's opinion" on the matter. It's easy to find inappropriate comments on RMS that defame him.
    - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
      > And I've seen very little that can disclaim that. Is that how we operate now? You have to see evidence that a claim isn't true?
    - Aspie96 3y ago
      > From what I gather the big thing is that he's basically very misogynistic. > And I've seen very little that can disclaim that. Hang on, no. It's those that claim that someone is misogynistic (let alone very misogynistic) that has the burden of showing that the accused has hatred or prejudice against women, not on others to disclaim it. If, to that, we add the absolute vilification against anyone trying to defend the accuse, then the allegations can't be evaluated properly in such an environment and deserve nothing but dismissal.
- acjohnson55 3y ago
  I know someone personally that he behaved unprofessionally and inappropriately towards. This was before allegations of his MIT went public. So I was not shocked when that happened.
- jongjong 3y ago
  He comes across as someone who is highly genuine. I guess that's why fake, phony, status-oriented people can't stop themselves criticizing him for all his superficial shortcomings. It's as if his genuineness is a trigger for them and they need to attack him to feel better about how phony they are in comparison.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
borbulon 3y ago
Having cancer myself, I can tell you that there are a lot of misconceptions about what life “under chemo” is like. I’m in a clinical trial for pills now, but when I was doing infusions, the worst of them had me out of commission for about 4 days - chemo day (which was about schedule, not side effects), then days 4, 5, and sometimes 6 after chemo day. The rest were completely manageable, in fact I looked forward to working. This is not to belittle his experience or cast him in a negative light; I wish him well and I know that overall it leaves you feeling less than normal, and I can completely relate. But “under chemo” is not always as debilitating as you might think.
- jraph 3y ago
  > the worst of them had me out of commission for about 4 days - chemo day (which was about schedule, not side effects), then days 4, 5, and sometimes 6 after chemo day Isn't chemo tolerated differently in different patients? It's still anecdotes, but I've heard many stories of people, some usually very dynamic, being strongly weakened by it. To the point some even decide it's not worth it and stop the treatment altogether. I personally know someone currently under chemo too. Anyway, it's good you tolerate it well and I wish you a good recovery!
  - AndyPa32 3y ago
    Yes, it's different for different patients. It's also true that chemo treatment has gotten better over the years. Chemo 20 years ago was much harsher and it's not the same anymore. Advancements in pharmacology.
  - funcDropShadow 3y ago
    > Isn't chemo tolerated differently in different patients? Chemo subsumes a large number of different medications. What they have in common is that they are basically poison, and you hope that the cancer cells die faster than you. The effects differ wildly between different treatments and patients.
- tyingq 3y ago
  "under chemo" though, isn't some single shared experience. Everyone in that infusion room with you is getting some different sort of poison cocktail in a different strength. And most of the drugs are, quite literally, poison. There's at least 7 broad, very different types of chemo drugs, and subcategories under that. Also, very different total duration and frequencies of infusion. And they all may have other things going on in terms of cancer progression, other unpleasant treatments (radiation, surgical procedures, etc) going on at the same time, and so on. Doxorubicin might be a good example. It has nicknames like "red death" and "red devil", and many unpleasant secondary side effects. Side effects that are different from other chemo drugs, including an unusually high rate of congestive heart failure.
nottorp 3y ago
Hmm I'm curious. He's been basically running non profits all his life. In the US. How can he afford the treatment? Is the FSF big enough to be able to get medical insurance for their employees?
- Mezzie 3y ago
  Every nonprofit I've worked for or interviewed for has offered me medical insurance.
- jandrewrogers 3y ago
  If you are poor, medical care is essentially free in the US. I know a few people that had excellent cancer care at some of the best oncology clinics in the country all paid for by the US government.
- nobody9999 3y ago
  >Hmm I'm curious. He's been basically running non profits all his life. In the US. How can he afford the treatment? Is the FSF big enough to be able to get medical insurance for their employees? Since he's 70, he's eligible for Medicare[0]. And likely has access to other insurance through his professional affiliation(s) as well. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States)
bawolff 3y ago
> He has/had arguable/unacceptable behavior, but I believe we strongly owe him. Arguably that describes most people ever considered heroes. Just look at the controversy of anyone who ever had a statue made of them I think to change the world you have to be somewhat not of it - you have to rebel against social norms. The people who rebel against social norms don't just rebel against the right ones but also are wrong sometimes too.
- jraph 3y ago
  There has to be some truth to this. However, you don't need to make women uneasy (among other things) to promote free software. His heroic work on free software shall not shield him from criticism about other aspects of him. Reacting because accepting bullshit from heroes is widespread but dangerous (not saying you are doing it).
  - rastapasta42 3y ago
    how did he make woman uneasy? Is dirty neckbeard a crime now? :(
    - jraph 3y ago
      > Is dirty neckbeard a crime now? Of course not. I'm obviously not talking about his appearance and could not care less about his hygiene.
  - someotherperson 3y ago
    > However, you don't need to make women uneasy (among other things) to promote free software. Plenty of people with physical disabilities make people "uneasy" -- who's wrong here? The burn victim or the person taking offence to it? Stallman didn't do anything towards women that warrants the criticism he received. The claims have been debunked and it just comes down to him coming across as a 'creep' -- aka considered unattractive. Yeah, okay.
    - jraph 3y ago
poorbutdebtfree 3y ago
[flagged]
- dang 3y ago
  We've banned this account for trolling. Please don't do that here.
jongjong 3y ago
Agreed. His impact has been hugely positive.
bjourne 3y ago
> He has/had arguable/unacceptable behavior, Can you explain what you mean?
- jraph 3y ago
  I did there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37699851#37702074 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37699851#37702074
  - bjourne 3y ago
    In that comment, just like in this one, you avoid mentioning anything specific. It appears that you are doing that because you can't defend any implied claims; that doing X, Y, and Z is unacceptable. It's a whispering game where the claims are prefixed with "according to some" or "perceived by many" because it's all smoke and mirrors and no substance. E.g you don't even specify whether it is some behaviour or opinions that are what are unacceptable.
    - jraph 3y ago
      I don't find any opinion of RMS unacceptable. I actually happen to find him very reasonable on most things. I've read he has had inappropriate behavior with women. I can't know for sure to which extent it is true or false. I find this plausible but have no proof and it could be wrong. The best I can find is this tweet from 2018 I cited in another comment about women at MIT trying to avoid him by putting plants in their offices. I find this quite bad but would agree it's weak. I also had in mind his harsh email answering this guy announcing his baby on some mailing list, or the numerous times he harshly dismissed questions at his presentations that were not perfectly phrased (that I actually saw it first hand). There's also this great talk from Keith Packard [1] were he states they didn't use the GPL for X (mostly) because RMS was so annoying. But the unacceptable status of any of these things is arguable and I fundamentally don't want to witch hunt him. In the end I still admire him and spending time on this is just annoying. So let's just say that I indeed have no strong evidence of him having unacceptable behavior, so let me clean things up and retract this claim until some strong evidence shows up. Thanks for keeping me in check. [1] A political history of X https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yqDJv4W7m8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yqDJv4W7m8

by jraph 3y ago

PlutoIsAPlanet 3y ago

He's also been the victim of some pretty vile smear campaigns and is still going on. I know if I was the target of the crap he got, I wouldn't want to continue doing anything anymore.

op00to 3y ago
[flagged]
- oblio 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - jonahbenton 3y ago
    Knew him a long time ago. It's a very different thing not understanding what other people are, compared to bearing them ill will. Definitely interactively incompetent, but doesn't carry ill will.
  - tokai 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - oblio 3y ago
      > Like clockwork. Doesn't make me wrong, even if you personally want to look the other way. Also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37702077 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37702077
    - joenot443 3y ago
      It's exhausting, isn't it? Moralizers will come for anyone and everything. Tearing down the world, one individual at a time, until finally, after enough characters have been destroyed and enough personalities beaten down, we'll all happily exist in a world where no one's behavior will ever offend. We can all rest easy knowing that we won, that the _____ists of the world have been banished, and finally egalitarianism will prevail. For those in this thread chomping at the bit to attack a dying 70yo's character, did I do your cause justice?
    - mustacheemperor 3y ago
      Like clockwork, women in tech continue to beg for our community to hold a reasonable standard for how half the humans on earth should be treated when they choose to work in this industry. Woohoo RS and thank you for your contributions. But one of those contributions is being a living example of how brilliant and highly valuable people in this field can still need to learn the basics on how to treat other people with respect. For the women he's mistreated, it's very unfortunate they had to play a role in that collective lesson. The least we can do is not ignore it or rationalize it away. On that note, I just don't appreciate or frankly understand the repeated insistence from some people that this is some kind of scheme, there is some kind of conspiracy to complain about successful contributors for mistreating the people around them. This take especially makes no sense to me when the mistreatment is well known and documented. Like, some of us don't want to be treated like shit! So we bring it up when the community lauds praise around someone who does! I don't think this is related to some personality complex held by RS' inferiors with a compulsion to tear down his achievements. Most of the time when I see these criticisms voiced, they are actually wrapped in a highly-polite package that includes heaps of praise besides.
  - op00to 3y ago
    I posted elsewhere in the thread he came to my university for a talk, and spent the time staring at women's chests.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - d_tr 3y ago
      Yeah you 're petty, we get it.
      - oblio 3y ago
        > Yeah you 're petty, we get it. Really? Should OP just bask in Stallman's glory and not notice things that were bad etiquette even in the Victorian era? Stallman's done some amazing somethings, some average things and some repugnant things (including the field of software engineering/Free Software; see the Emacs and GCC forks, his maintanership of Emacs in the latter part of his time as main maintainer, etc).
        d_tr 3y ago
        > Should OP just bask in Stallman's glory and not notice things that were bad etiquette even in the Victorian era? No. But I 'm not sure whether you 've read OP's other comments in this topic (about Stallman's cancer), some of which are hidden due to downvotes.
  - jraph 3y ago
    I think there are two different things: - the MIT mailing list discussion of a few years ago where he got a lot of flakes for what I indeed believe was a lot of misunderstanding. He seemed reasonable to me, but you really need subtle and careful reading to notice this. It was easy to misread and understand the contrary of was he thinks. I think he should have refrained from participating in this discussion though. While I don't know if it was intentionally driven by opponents, I do think he was defamed a lot, regardless one's opinion on this story. - his inappropriate behavior with women, who mostly had to (find tricks to) avoid him, from was I read there and there. I don't think he is misogynistic (many examples on stallman.org supports the opposite) but I believe there's no excuse for this inappropriate behavior if true. He should have shown more respect and learned to avoid making people and women in particular uncomfortable. He is incredibly clever, I can't imagine he would be unable to learn what patterns to avoid, he should have bothered more. I know it's difficult in particular for some autistic people (which he might be) to take hints, but I also know some who became incredibly good at it after learning (better than non-autistic people even, precisely because it was a conscious process - not saying it's easy; it is exhausting for some people). And it does not require being able to take subtle hints to avoid obvious sexist behavior. I was thinking of this and the many times he was mean to someone when I mentioned "unacceptable" in my first comment.
    - op00to 3y ago
      When I hear stuff like "you need really subtle and careful reading"... it's just an excuse to discount the actual content of the message and invent the meaning you wanted all along. Like, how could I be so stupid to not pick up on this totally opposite point from what RMS was saying?
      - jraph 3y ago
        This point was discussed at length over the years. You have your opinion on it. Likely different from mine. At this point I don't think any of us can change their mind, we both have been forming our respective opinion for a long time now. Let me precise my phrasing: you might have read this thing with "really subtle and careful reading" and reached a different opinion from mine. I believe it. It's fine. But I do maintain that, in any case, you need really subtle and careful reading to avoid jumping to widely wrong conclusions. I think it was easy to understand horrible things from his wording by skipping a word or two or thinking too fast. The thing with Stallman in particular is that he is particularly very careful with his wording, and I think this whole MIT discussion was no counterexample to this. It's up to us to understand the right thing and it is clear that strongly different interpretations emerged this time, for some reason. And what's worse is that his clarifications might have strengthened both interpretations. Anyway, that's why I said "Regardless on one's opinion" on the matter. It's easy to find inappropriate comments on RMS that defame him.
  - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
    > And I've seen very little that can disclaim that. Is that how we operate now? You have to see evidence that a claim isn't true?
  - Aspie96 3y ago
    > From what I gather the big thing is that he's basically very misogynistic. > And I've seen very little that can disclaim that. Hang on, no. It's those that claim that someone is misogynistic (let alone very misogynistic) that has the burden of showing that the accused has hatred or prejudice against women, not on others to disclaim it. If, to that, we add the absolute vilification against anyone trying to defend the accuse, then the allegations can't be evaluated properly in such an environment and deserve nothing but dismissal.
acjohnson55 3y ago
I know someone personally that he behaved unprofessionally and inappropriately towards. This was before allegations of his MIT went public. So I was not shocked when that happened.
jongjong 3y ago
He comes across as someone who is highly genuine. I guess that's why fake, phony, status-oriented people can't stop themselves criticizing him for all his superficial shortcomings. It's as if his genuineness is a trigger for them and they need to attack him to feel better about how phony they are in comparison.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

borbulon 3y ago

Having cancer myself, I can tell you that there are a lot of misconceptions about what life “under chemo” is like. I’m in a clinical trial for pills now, but when I was doing infusions, the worst of them had me out of commission for about 4 days - chemo day (which was about schedule, not side effects), then days 4, 5, and sometimes 6 after chemo day. The rest were completely manageable, in fact I looked forward to working. This is not to belittle his experience or cast him in a negative light; I wish him well and I know that overall it leaves you feeling less than normal, and I can completely relate. But “under chemo” is not always as debilitating as you might think.

jraph 3y ago
> the worst of them had me out of commission for about 4 days - chemo day (which was about schedule, not side effects), then days 4, 5, and sometimes 6 after chemo day Isn't chemo tolerated differently in different patients? It's still anecdotes, but I've heard many stories of people, some usually very dynamic, being strongly weakened by it. To the point some even decide it's not worth it and stop the treatment altogether. I personally know someone currently under chemo too. Anyway, it's good you tolerate it well and I wish you a good recovery!
- AndyPa32 3y ago
  Yes, it's different for different patients. It's also true that chemo treatment has gotten better over the years. Chemo 20 years ago was much harsher and it's not the same anymore. Advancements in pharmacology.
- funcDropShadow 3y ago
  > Isn't chemo tolerated differently in different patients? Chemo subsumes a large number of different medications. What they have in common is that they are basically poison, and you hope that the cancer cells die faster than you. The effects differ wildly between different treatments and patients.
tyingq 3y ago
"under chemo" though, isn't some single shared experience. Everyone in that infusion room with you is getting some different sort of poison cocktail in a different strength. And most of the drugs are, quite literally, poison. There's at least 7 broad, very different types of chemo drugs, and subcategories under that. Also, very different total duration and frequencies of infusion. And they all may have other things going on in terms of cancer progression, other unpleasant treatments (radiation, surgical procedures, etc) going on at the same time, and so on. Doxorubicin might be a good example. It has nicknames like "red death" and "red devil", and many unpleasant secondary side effects. Side effects that are different from other chemo drugs, including an unusually high rate of congestive heart failure.

nottorp 3y ago

Hmm I'm curious. He's been basically running non profits all his life. In the US. How can he afford the treatment? Is the FSF big enough to be able to get medical insurance for their employees?

Mezzie 3y ago
Every nonprofit I've worked for or interviewed for has offered me medical insurance.
jandrewrogers 3y ago
If you are poor, medical care is essentially free in the US. I know a few people that had excellent cancer care at some of the best oncology clinics in the country all paid for by the US government.
nobody9999 3y ago
>Hmm I'm curious. He's been basically running non profits all his life. In the US. How can he afford the treatment? Is the FSF big enough to be able to get medical insurance for their employees? Since he's 70, he's eligible for Medicare[0]. And likely has access to other insurance through his professional affiliation(s) as well. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States)

bawolff 3y ago

> He has/had arguable/unacceptable behavior, but I believe we strongly owe him. Arguably that describes most people ever considered heroes. Just look at the controversy of anyone who ever had a statue made of them I think to change the world you have to be somewhat not of it - you have to rebel against social norms. The people who rebel against social norms don't just rebel against the right ones but also are wrong sometimes too.

jraph 3y ago
There has to be some truth to this. However, you don't need to make women uneasy (among other things) to promote free software. His heroic work on free software shall not shield him from criticism about other aspects of him. Reacting because accepting bullshit from heroes is widespread but dangerous (not saying you are doing it).
- rastapasta42 3y ago
  how did he make woman uneasy? Is dirty neckbeard a crime now? :(
  - jraph 3y ago
    > Is dirty neckbeard a crime now? Of course not. I'm obviously not talking about his appearance and could not care less about his hygiene.
- someotherperson 3y ago
  > However, you don't need to make women uneasy (among other things) to promote free software. Plenty of people with physical disabilities make people "uneasy" -- who's wrong here? The burn victim or the person taking offence to it? Stallman didn't do anything towards women that warrants the criticism he received. The claims have been debunked and it just comes down to him coming across as a 'creep' -- aka considered unattractive. Yeah, okay.
  - jraph 3y ago

poorbutdebtfree 3y ago

[flagged]

dang 3y ago
We've banned this account for trolling. Please don't do that here.

jongjong 3y ago

Agreed. His impact has been hugely positive.

bjourne 3y ago

> He has/had arguable/unacceptable behavior, Can you explain what you mean?

jraph 3y ago
I did there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37699851#37702074 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37699851#37702074
- bjourne 3y ago
  In that comment, just like in this one, you avoid mentioning anything specific. It appears that you are doing that because you can't defend any implied claims; that doing X, Y, and Z is unacceptable. It's a whispering game where the claims are prefixed with "according to some" or "perceived by many" because it's all smoke and mirrors and no substance. E.g you don't even specify whether it is some behaviour or opinions that are what are unacceptable.
  - jraph 3y ago
    I don't find any opinion of RMS unacceptable. I actually happen to find him very reasonable on most things. I've read he has had inappropriate behavior with women. I can't know for sure to which extent it is true or false. I find this plausible but have no proof and it could be wrong. The best I can find is this tweet from 2018 I cited in another comment about women at MIT trying to avoid him by putting plants in their offices. I find this quite bad but would agree it's weak. I also had in mind his harsh email answering this guy announcing his baby on some mailing list, or the numerous times he harshly dismissed questions at his presentations that were not perfectly phrased (that I actually saw it first hand). There's also this great talk from Keith Packard [1] were he states they didn't use the GPL for X (mostly) because RMS was so annoying. But the unacceptable status of any of these things is arguable and I fundamentally don't want to witch hunt him. In the end I still admire him and spending time on this is just annoying. So let's just say that I indeed have no strong evidence of him having unacceptable behavior, so let me clean things up and retract this claim until some strong evidence shows up. Thanks for keeping me in check. [1] A political history of X https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yqDJv4W7m8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yqDJv4W7m8