4 ms·

I think the problem is looking at ND as an excuse rather than a reason to change intervention strategies. Like...yeah, he had a problematic position. He got c

by chrsig 2y ago

I think the problem is looking at ND as an excuse rather than a reason to change intervention strategies. Like...yeah, he had a problematic position. He got corrected and someone explained to him the problem and he reversed his position[0]. That's...how people grow. [0] https://www.engadget.com/2019-09-17-rms-fsf-mit-epstein.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-09-17-rms-fsf-mit-epstein.html

kennyloginz 2y ago
The original article mentions how this is an example of him doubling down. Stallman makes it very clear that he doesn’t consider 12yo+ “children”.
drewdevault 2y ago
Your cited source is not really a good view of the situation. He did not reverse his position at all on the Minsky/Epstein issue (and the article quotes Stallman doubling down on this, saying he's resigning over "a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations" of himself), and he was re-instated at the FSF without ever providing a meaningful apology or a reversal of any of his problematic positions. Following his reinstatement he has continued to maintain and advocate for problematic political views regarding sexual assault, and he has never meaningfully retracted his views on child sexual abuse or apologized for anything he has ever said.
- chrsig 2y ago
  Fair enough. Sigh. I can't help but wonder if the initial blowblack didn't cause some amount of oppositional defiance. or if the FSF just can't operate without him or the inverse. Kind of his life's work. Not excusing his behavior, just trying to understand it (without putting in enough effort to really understand it, I suppose). I guess I still have to hope that there's some plausible explanation beyond "he's a shitty person". Maybe there's room for a new foundation for anyone that wanted to pick up the torch. Aside from that, I'm not really sure what there is to do. Thanks for defending the ND world.

by chrsig 2y ago

kennyloginz 2y ago

The original article mentions how this is an example of him doubling down. Stallman makes it very clear that he doesn’t consider 12yo+ “children”.

drewdevault 2y ago

Your cited source is not really a good view of the situation. He did not reverse his position at all on the Minsky/Epstein issue (and the article quotes Stallman doubling down on this, saying he's resigning over "a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations" of himself), and he was re-instated at the FSF without ever providing a meaningful apology or a reversal of any of his problematic positions. Following his reinstatement he has continued to maintain and advocate for problematic political views regarding sexual assault, and he has never meaningfully retracted his views on child sexual abuse or apologized for anything he has ever said.

chrsig 2y ago
Fair enough. Sigh. I can't help but wonder if the initial blowblack didn't cause some amount of oppositional defiance. or if the FSF just can't operate without him or the inverse. Kind of his life's work. Not excusing his behavior, just trying to understand it (without putting in enough effort to really understand it, I suppose). I guess I still have to hope that there's some plausible explanation beyond "he's a shitty person". Maybe there's room for a new foundation for anyone that wanted to pick up the torch. Aside from that, I'm not really sure what there is to do. Thanks for defending the ND world.