Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Defense of Richard Stallman

geoff.greer.fm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 681 posts

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#101

Post by Chris2048 »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #69
sergiosgc wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It wasn't just awkward demeanor. He actively made women feel unwelcome in the workplace and behaved unprofessionally over and over again. Every episode I read about fell into the category of "socially awkward adult male". If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. By all means, point me to a real abuse scenario by Stallman. I like being prove…

Ignoring a legal age of consent, refusing to accept the accepted definitions of assault and rape, and claiming they were actually willing are emphatically not just "socially awkward".

He did not "ignore" age of consent, and what you describe as "refusing to accept the accepted definitions" is not refusal to accept the law, as you ambiguously characterise it, but the crime of arguing how unhelpful those definitions are in the context he describes.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#102

Post by [deleted] »

sumedh wrote: post #41

> He held his positions at MIT, GNU, and the FSF for over thirty years, and in that time nobody accused him of coercion, unwanted touching, or verbal harassment. The author missed the point of the Me Too movement. Lot of other powerful people were not publicly accused for decades because they were powerful and could easily silence their accusers.

[deleted]

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#103

Post by isoprophlex »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #69
sergiosgc wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It wasn't just awkward demeanor. He actively made women feel unwelcome in the workplace and behaved unprofessionally over and over again. Every episode I read about fell into the category of "socially awkward adult male". If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. By all means, point me to a real abuse scenario by Stallman. I like being prove…

Ignoring a legal age of consent, refusing to accept the accepted definitions of assault and rape, and claiming they were actually willing are emphatically not just "socially awkward".

No. Wrong. You, and many others, seem incapable of parsing basic sentences.

RMS claimed it was plausible that she presented herself to Minsky as willing, due to coercion by Epstein.

There's a big difference.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#104

Post by spats1990 »

metiscus wrote: post #74
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignoring a legal age of consent, refusing to accept the accepted definitions of assault and rape, and claiming they were actually willing are emphatically not just "socially awkward".

Can you cite some specific evidence for your specific claims?

On his website, for example, Stallman says that he "reject[s] the term sexual assault" completely.[1]

~edit: I have included the full quote below as I did not intend to twist/misrepresent in any way.

Stallman writes: " The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same.

There seems to be an exception for TSA agents, however.

The term is further stretched to include sexual harassment, which is not a specific act, but rather a pattern of acts that amounts to a form of gender bias. Gender bias is rightly prohibited in certain situations for the sake of equal opportunity.

I don't think that rape should be treated like stealing a kiss, so I reject the term "sexual assault" completely."

[1]https://stallman.org/antiglossary.html#assult

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#105

Post by equalunique »

youdontknowtho wrote: post #25

The article says you don't get the free software movement without RMS. What about BSD?

BSD is open source, but not "free" in the GNU sense. A GNU license keeps the software free. BSD license keeps the distributor & developer "free," but not the software itself.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#107

Post by klingonopera »

Traster wrote: post #23

There's quite a lot in this. I don't think it's helpful to throw in stuff like "He is now likely homeless" - gossip/rumour I'm sure this author would be decrying if the other side of the argument had brought it up. We don't know anything about RMS's personal life and shouldn't speculate. Now let's address the underlying point: You don't get X good thing without Y bad behaviour. I don't agree with this. It's a weird s…

> You don't get X good thing without Y bad behaviour.

Consider the following: Humans have limited capacity, thus time, money and energy spent limiting Y inhibits resources available to creating X.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#108

Post by goatinaboat »

CPLX wrote: post #47

Our culture has made a very bright line decision that sex with minors is unacceptable. Expressing doubt about this cultural norm, or especially advocating against it, is considered unacceptable. Of course one can argue with the merits of those two facts, but they are plainly true and fairly widely accepted. The very concept of statutory rape reinforces how clear this judgment is. The reference to "statutory" means th…

Our culture has made a very bright line decision that sex with minors is unacceptable.

I wish that were true, but the sufficiently well-connected and powerful continue not to be brought to account.

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#109

Post by [deleted] »

sumedh wrote: post #41

> He held his positions at MIT, GNU, and the FSF for over thirty years, and in that time nobody accused him of coercion, unwanted touching, or verbal harassment. The author missed the point of the Me Too movement. Lot of other powerful people were not publicly accused for decades because they were powerful and could easily silence their accusers.

[deleted]

Re: In Defense of Richard Stallman

#110

Post by viraptor »

sergiosgc wrote: post #36
Barrin92 wrote: post #10

> They focused on his tone deaf communication style and awkward demeanor. They spoke of behavior from decades ago and pointed out the fact that he had a mattress in his office. It wasn't just awkward demeanor. He actively made women feel unwelcome in the workplace and behaved unprofessionally over and over again. > He held his positions at MIT, GNU, and the FSF for over thirty years, and in that time nobody accused h…

> It wasn't just awkward demeanor. He actively made women feel unwelcome in the workplace and behaved unprofessionally over and over again. Every episode I read about fell into the category of "socially awkward adult male". If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. By all means, point me to a real abuse scenario by Stallman. I like being prove…

> If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity.

There's a difference between tolerating it to a degree and letting leaders continue uncomfortable awkwardness. If it's enough to distance people, maybe they're not a great candidate for a leader. That doesn't remove anything from their achievements and abilities to contribute or to spread new ideas. The post says "If an occasional social gaffe or failed attempt at humor is all it takes to get thrown out on the street" - entirely omitting the space occupied by almost all of us: between homelessness and being a leader of a global movement/organisation.

We can at the same time tolerate awkwardness and hold our local and global leaders to high standards.

Post reply on HN