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

RMS Support Letter

rms-support-letter.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: RMS Support Letter

#31

Post by thefz »

guipsp wrote: post #22
thefz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is already a mechanism in place if Stallman has infringed any law, and it is not Twitter threads. The mere disliking of man's behavior does not constitute ground for his harassment in turn. Hitting on women is no crime. That linked thread is nothing but a person disagreeing with RMS's fringiest opinions. Stop with the empty mobbing of people just because you do not agree with them.

The standard on public behavior doesn't stop at what's legal or not. At least I would hope so.

Yet you don't get a man to abdicate from a life's work because some things he said in the past may get on someone's nerves. Especially with a civil rights fighter and advocate like RMS you have to weigh in what he has done too.

Re: RMS Support Letter

#34

Post by [deleted] »

guipsp wrote: post #28
Bancakes wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything more than unverifiable claims from 30 years ago? And even then, how is sleeping on a mattress oppressive? I also sleep on a mattress. I've also asked girls out when I was young, and been declined (once). That is some twisted mythos regarding RMS. All his online, TV, and keynote appearances have proven him to be a misunderstood and harmless tech expert. What is your experience from speaking to him personally?

I can link more: https://wwahammy.com/on-safety-at-libreplanet/ But I fear no matter how much I link it will never be enough.

[deleted]

Re: RMS Support Letter

#35

Post by drivingmenuts »

Bancakes wrote: post #16
guipsp wrote: post #5

Even if you excuse his terrible personal opinions and his egregious personal hygiene, you cannot excuse his behaviour, specially around women. https://twitter.com/_sagesharp_/status/1173637138413318144?s...

You didn't actually post any evidence of allegedly inexcusable behaviour around women.

Did you read the Twitter thread? It cited examples of his quite objectionable opinions.

Granted, he might have thoroughly recanted those statements, but they are always going to be baggage that the FSF is going to be stuck defending, which is not part of their mission.

Surely, there are other people who made better decisions about what is defensible and what is not.

Re: RMS Support Letter

#36

Post by Bancakes »

drivingmenuts wrote: post #35
Bancakes wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't actually post any evidence of allegedly inexcusable behaviour around women.

Did you read the Twitter thread? It cited examples of his quite objectionable opinions. Granted, he might have thoroughly recanted those statements, but they are always going to be baggage that the FSF is going to be stuck defending, which is not part of their mission. Surely, there are other people who made better decisions about what is defensible and what is not.

>objectionable

Things taken out of context, at worst. At best, personal opinions.

>FSF is going to be stuck defending

From what? Outrage culture? A self-made problem? FSF is about software and software licenses, not blogposting and whataboutism.

>Surely,

No, there is not one person as qualified on free software as RMS and Torvalds, for as long as those two are alive. It's unacceptable that a non-engineer takes the lead in FSF, a software engineering oriented organisation. Maybe it'll be fine for IBM, Oracle or other profit and customer satisfaction oriented businesses to have a PR person.

Re: RMS Support Letter

#37

Post by dragonwriter »

Bancakes wrote: post #36
drivingmenuts wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the Twitter thread? It cited examples of his quite objectionable opinions. Granted, he might have thoroughly recanted those statements, but they are always going to be baggage that the FSF is going to be stuck defending, which is not part of their mission. Surely, there are other people who made better decisions about what is defensible and what is not.

>objectionable Things taken out of context, at worst. At best, personal opinions. >FSF is going to be stuck defending From what? Outrage culture? A self-made problem? FSF is about software and software licenses, not blogposting and whataboutism. >Surely, No, there is not one person as qualified on free software as RMS and Torvalds, for as long as those two are alive. It's unacceptable that a non-engineer takes the le…

> FSF is about software and software licenses

Like all advocacy organizations, the FSF is mostly about PR. “Software and software licenses” are the target area of impact.

Re: RMS Support Letter

#38

Post by movaps »

guipsp wrote: post #22
thefz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is already a mechanism in place if Stallman has infringed any law, and it is not Twitter threads. The mere disliking of man's behavior does not constitute ground for his harassment in turn. Hitting on women is no crime. That linked thread is nothing but a person disagreeing with RMS's fringiest opinions. Stop with the empty mobbing of people just because you do not agree with them.

The standard on public behavior doesn't stop at what's legal or not. At least I would hope so.

I assume MIT has a department which handles sexual harassment incidents. Why has none of this gone through proper channels if it's so egregious?

Re: RMS Support Letter

#39

Post by movaps »

pityJuke wrote: post #7
guipsp wrote: post #5

Even if you excuse his terrible personal opinions and his egregious personal hygiene, you cannot excuse his behaviour, specially around women. https://twitter.com/_sagesharp_/status/1173637138413318144?s...

What is annoying is the original open letter failed to go into depth about all this. I'd heard rumblings about this around the original time he was removed from various positions, but the hard transcripts here really solidify the opinion RMS is a bit of a creep. Like, "pleasure cards"? Come on dude.

He was told off for asking people out. His (an autistic man keep in mind) solution was "pleasure cards", as opposed to business cards. It's a very tame innuendo which suffers from outdated language. People don't use the word "pleasure" casually today.

Here's a picture of one of said cards - how shocking: https://twitter.com/bella_velo/status/1172524864193945603/ph...

Re: RMS Support Letter

#40

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #27
ivanstegic wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you just miss September 2019? Refresh your memory: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/09/17/computer...

I remember it very well. Please include his quote because I don't remember anything vile in it. I do remember though how several media outlets misquoted him ("Stallman defends Epstein", "Stallman describes the victim as 'entirely willing'") attributing to him the words he never said. Many of these still run this false story, with no correction nor apology.

The very fact that instead of a reply I receive downvotes is a good summary of the general situation.
Post reply on HN