Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him • Hacker News Board

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#361

Post by marvin » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:37 AM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #333

strenholme wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw a lot of that movement too, probably not as much as you. My sense is that no one was finding any real satisfaction from having short term strictly sexual relationships, and my sense in this day and age of #MeToo (which I very strongly feel has become a witch hunt) is that some men were hurting some women emotionally by only wanting them for sex.

Right. I was an illegal immigrant from Russia. And an LSD dealer. I was also ~homeless, and living out of a VW bug. It wasn't about having "meaningful relationships". It was about having fun. And forgetting about dying in a nuclear war. For those who weren't alive in 1962, you really have no clue.

Just wanted to say it’s fantastic to see this perspective expressed so clearly, when many have taken the puritanical aspects of feminism to heart as something that’s obvious and certain in educated society.

It’s as if certain aspects of preferences and free will are now inconceivable. Refreshing to see a more accurate historical account.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#362

Post by noobermin » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:37 AM UTC

comex wrote: post #356

noobermin wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the issues whenever this sort of cancelling occurs is of the people who come out of the woodwork to join in the calls, it turns out some of them have personal issues with the person aside from their contentious conduct. This is why these things, as others have mentioned, should be tried in official channels, not merely be executed in response to public attitudes and press releases.

What official channels? Nobody has accused RMS of anything that constitutes a crime. (But it's not surprising that the necessary qualifications for leading the FSF are stricter than the qualifications for not being in jail.)

The board could have met, deliberated, have an honest discussion, reviewed evidence. Not simply oust him a week later.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#363

Post by Arnt » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:39 AM UTC

kragen wrote: post #316

Arnt wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first I heard was about how he was a guest in Denmark almost 30 years ago and fouled up his room. Nothing bad happened to him, he was lucky. Stallman had luck with public opinion many, many times. This time his luck changed. It's unfair to deplore the bad luck and forget about all the times he had benefited from good luck.

Fouled up his room? What do you mean, like, he couldn't figure out how to operate the hotel room door lock?

No, he stayed as a guest at the home of one of the DKUUG regulars and his girlgriend, who afterwards wrote an angry article about it in the DKUUG-nyt. I see the early-nineties issues have been scanned, http://www.dkuug.dk/wp-content/themes/dkuug/arkiv, but I haven't the time to look through them now. The main issues were matters of personal hygiene and the way he treated the girlfriend.

Much the same all been posted later, again and again, https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/richard_stallmans_disgrac... links and quotes a bit.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#364

Post by noobermin » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:42 AM UTC

faissaloo wrote: post #307

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #72

We are, sadly, entering a new age of conformity. Aligning yourself with what main stream society thinks is correct is now more important than anything else. The response of course is that "bad behavior should never be excused, regardless of ability!" which leads to a losing argument in which we try to say what kind of good excuses what kind of bad. But this presupposes the conformist stance: that fitting in with the…

>We are, sadly, entering a new age of conformity. Aligning yourself with what main stream society thinks is correct is now more important than anything else. This is why you should develop a second personality, at first it's exhausting but eventually you get the hang of it. >But maybe it's this fear that leads us rushing back to deep moral systems likes religious fantastics when their faith is questioned. Or perhaps…

>Or perhaps it's simply that in the abscence of religious structures the mob decides morality.

I'm pretty sure this isn't what Nietzsche had in mind.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#365

Post by dependenttypes » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:42 AM UTC

NiekvdMaas wrote: post #309

unityByFreedom wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. It's not clear to me whether or not RMS still believes these things. He may need time to collect himself. In the mean time, I don't understand blog posts like this one that completely gloss over his past statements which remain the same without further comment.

Well... He updated the link 12 years later (last year) because the original one was broken. So it's pretty much clear he still holds these beliefs. If he made a statement that he changed his mind, I'd be happy to see it.

https://www.stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_Septe...

and for 2016: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biograp...

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#366

Post by throwaway98724 » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:42 AM UTC

throwaway98724 wrote: post #346

mr_woozy wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not getting defensive I'm pointing out an argument that stems from feelings and is only supported by feelings has no basis in discussion, since they are not axioms for discussion but subjective. The OP starts out dismissing logical arguments and then pats himself on the back for seeing through the grand conspiracy of analytical thought.

> I'm pointing out an argument that stems from feelings and is only supported by feelings has no basis in discussion. Is this so? Let’s call the statement above P0. Let’s start from first principles. A discussion is performed by agents (peer interlocutors, a speaker and its audience, etc). I believe we can make it an axiom of our discussion that there are at least two sentient agents involved. Assume two (A1 and A2),…

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21122793 (can't edit, for some reason)

p.s. By the way, the above throwaway comment is also a self-demonstrating example in another way. I wrote it only to make a point regarding the idea that "logical arguments are the only kind of worthwhile communication, talking based on feelings is incorrect/unacceptable". However, this still shows up in a thread about recent news involving RMS. This comment is neither pro or against RMS or the reasons for his resignation(s). I don't believe it will be read as either, but it certainly could be read in that context. Given part of the discussion is about reading the social cues, particularly during an emotionally charged topic of discussion... I do wonder if this is an example of what not to do (strategically)? And, if so, whether that is a good thing or not (normatively). Provided as food for thought, I have not arrived to an answer nor am I engaged in seeking one.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#367

Post by dependenttypes » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:44 AM UTC

NiekvdMaas wrote: post #223

unityByFreedom wrote: post #163

Perhaps this author is unaware of the number of statements Stallman has made regarding pedophilia on his website over the years [1]. If RMS has changed his point of view, he can go back to those parts of his blog and add an update. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=pedophile+site%3Astallman.or...

100% agreed. This is one of the worst examples: https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20Jun... I'm all for freedom of speech, but I don't see how people can defend these kind of opinions he's advocating.

Maybe they agree with him or believe that one should be allowed to hold even controversial opinions, is this too far-fetched?

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#368

Post by dependenttypes » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:49 AM UTC

olliej wrote: post #47

No, he has been widely reported for decades that he behaved unprofessionally, and harassed women who worked with him. That it took him publicly taking the position that child sex work was acceptable is the problem - his long history should have got him fired decades ago.

He did not say that...

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#369

Post by sergioj97 » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:49 AM UTC

houssc wrote: post #28

WillPostForFood wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different than police planting evidence on a known bad guy and saying, well he was a criminal anyway so who cares, justice was done by putting him in jail with falsified evidence. As long as you get what your deserve, process is irrelevant.

Was something planted in Stallman's case? Blowing his quotes out of proportion isn't the same thing as planting evidence. I suppose a better analogy is being on your second strike and doing some minor crime to get your third. Some would argue people on two strikes should keep their head down. Furthermore his quotes are pretty fucking creepy.

Selam G wrote that Stallman considered that Minsky's victim was actually willing.

That's not "planting evidence" in a legal sense because sure, that's not evidence at all. Mainly because it isn't true and it's easily verifiable. But in this context, by these people, it has been taken as actual evidence against Stallman. I guess that's the rationale behind the analogy.

Re: Richard Stallman Has Been Vilified by Those Who Don’t Know Him

#370

Post by darawk » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 7:49 AM UTC

Arnt wrote: post #289

jplayer01 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, Bushnell and the response to him clearly show none of this should be decided in the court of public opinion. Even if either of these people are correct, none of what we've read or heard so far is in any way sufficient to condemn Stallmann and ruin his career and none of us is in an appropriate position to make that determination. He underwent utter character assassination in the media who went to great lengt…

The first I heard was about how he was a guest in Denmark almost 30 years ago and fouled up his room. Nothing bad happened to him, he was lucky. Stallman had luck with public opinion many, many times. This time his luck changed. It's unfair to deplore the bad luck and forget about all the times he had benefited from good luck.

Nobody is talking about luck. He was the victim of an unfair and unjust attack by the media, who distorted his words in a disgusting way. There is no way to justify that by referring to his other behavior, no matter how bad it may be.