Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly asking, what's the difference between someone being neurodivergent and just thoughtless / mean / an ass?
Whether they can control it?
Or even being aware of it?
Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
261–270 of 943 posts
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#262Richard says he's not autistic. People who try to conflate his bad behaviour and autism are excusing his behaviour and unfairly generalising about autistic people. Richard is argumentative about his bad behaviour. He's not oblivious. Plenty of people have spoken to him about it. You'd think he might take a hint after being removed from his own organisation and all the surrounding commentary. He doesn't care. (Separat…
No, I think claiming one can extrapolate from one particular autistic person to all autistic people is "unfairly generalising about autistic people." Autism is a broad spectrum (and far from unidimensional) which manifests in a broad diversity of ways. I'll generally excuse people who are trying to do the right thing. Richard is trying to do the right thing. If you don't, you'll do very badly in other cultures. By US…
He doesn't do the right thing. He becomes agitated and sometimes aggressive when anyone points out that they're uncomfortable with his behaviour. He is not interested in their perspective or comfort.
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is something cut off in that quote? I don't understand how to read it
"There is no single person that is so deserving of praise [that] their comments deprecating others should be allowed to slide. Particularly when those comments are excuses about rape, assault, and child sex trafficking.”
Ah! Thank you
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah thats me, I don't care about 'intent' as much as 'outcome' All the well meaning in the world doesn't mean shit if you're creating hostility or demeaning others (that is not commentary on RMS, just in general)
"I don't care about 'intent' as much as 'outcome'" Accidentaly killing someone with your car is very different to negligent driving which causes death which is also very different to intentionally killing someone with your car. Clearly intent and context matters a lot.
Not so different to the deceased, though.
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#265I think it is strange that, on the one hand, the tech world has been advocating for the rights of neurodivergent people – society should accept that people on the autism spectrum are different and that’s OK. But at the same time RMS has been attacked for some statements very probably stemming from his autism that, while they may seem a bit shocking and at odds with the mainstream, were not illegal or intentionally of…
I am an incredibly neurodivergent person and through focused effort, driven by caring about how other people feel , I've picked up on many social cues. I am comfortable excluding people who use their neurodivergence as an excuse to be unkind to other people.
>I am comfortable excluding people who
Could this be an opportunity for your focused effort? Exclusion is dramatically unkind.
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, he did, multiple times. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20994216
I find it refreshing to see someone willing to talk and think about these taboo kind of subjects. Myself I think it (sexual interaction) boils down to mutual consent, but there's obviously an age where a person cannot grasp the scope of what they're consenting to. And necrophilia fails this definition since consent is impossible (unless written in a will). And now having looked into what he was actually accused of, o…
The law literally is about age of consent.
As a society we deem young people too immature to make important decisions for themselves.
Nothing about calling him on his ridiculous views is related to "wokeness". One guy saying "hey maybe fucking kids isn't bad" is not in any way related to social injustice - society in general says that fucking kids is bad. Edit: unless you agree with his claims - then I guess you might see it as "social injustice".
This is just a weirdo saying weird shit, and then other people (you) trying to latch onto the new version of "don't blame me, back in my day it was OK".
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am an incredibly neurodivergent person and through focused effort, driven by caring about how other people feel , I've picked up on many social cues. I am comfortable excluding people who use their neurodivergence as an excuse to be unkind to other people.
>I am comfortable excluding people who Could this be an opportunity for your focused effort? Exclusion is dramatically unkind.
It is unkind, but sometimes one has to be unkind to prevent greater harms from happening. Such is life.
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just the same excuse as the age old "Boys will be boys" excuse. Just because somebody is different doesn't mean they can be a creep and general unpleasant person to work with, without there eventually being repercussions.
not really. 'boys will be boys' doesn't assert that 'boys' get away with whatever they want because they are neuro-divergent, it asserts that gender allows for additional privilege. >Just because somebody is different doesn't mean they can be a creep For the sake of argument : what if that person has neurological quirks which disallow 'non-creep' , to use your parlance, behavior? To take the example even further , it…
Take it to the extreme - murder is illegal; if you kill someone because you're a bad bad person, we jail you. If you kill someone because you're "insane"...we still remove you from society, but you just get treatment instead of punishment. We still consider the act of killing someone unacceptable.
If swearing at the beach is unacceptable, full stop, then it's unacceptable for a person with or without TS. (Personally, that sounds like a dumb law, but what do I know)
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way is RMS a bad person? He has always seemed pretty honest and well intentioned. Its just he doesn't know when to shut his mouth or which hills are worth dying on.
I will say his “opinions” on child rape and children with disabilities are despicable and immoral, and not just a matter of him being eccentric. While he might sincerely believe such things that is hardly an endorsement of his character. But it’s not just his horrible opinions: for decades he constantly harassed women at MIT (students and faculty), especially teenagers. The details are really quite gross: https://sel…
The lead horrifying story is truly "quite gross":
I recall being told early in my freshman year “If RMS hits on you, just say ‘I’m a vi user’ even if it’s not true.”
Re: Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF
#270I think it is strange that, on the one hand, the tech world has been advocating for the rights of neurodivergent people – society should accept that people on the autism spectrum are different and that’s OK. But at the same time RMS has been attacked for some statements very probably stemming from his autism that, while they may seem a bit shocking and at odds with the mainstream, were not illegal or intentionally of…
It wasn’t just a few statements. It is a constellation of issues that make him very hard to interact with. A few final statements did bring him down, but he had been chipping at the foundation for years.
Okay. I think your statements indicate you are a jerk.
Do I now suddenly get to punish you? Do I get to go to your boss and try to get him to fire you?
See the problem?