101–110 of 227 posts
Challenge the popular boy and girls? They'll whip up a mob all too desperate to show their "virtue" so they don't get the same treatment. Whatever the original issue is becomes impossible to discuss, you're either "for 'em or agi'n 'em".
This has little to do with RMS but instead the appalling attitude of those who are in favor of cancel culture. Historians have failed you: this behavior and mentality will lead to a dark dead end. We must be tolerant and even accepting of those with whom we disagree with. Opinions are fleeting, but we are all human and that won’t change in our lifetime.
You can tolerate people without putting them in positions of leadership. No one has a right to a seat on the FSF board - it's dependent on behavior in accordance with the organization's principles.
A well written piece by Perens, but his focus on Stallman's disability leaves the reader to reach the point on their own, which may be difficult for some (perhaps those with similar issues to Stallman). The point is that people (and corporations) should be more tolerant of the views of others. They are not required to agree, but they should not automatically push the "cancel" button. I don't agree with everything tha…
Can we not act like the Second World War and consequently Karl Popper’s “ The Open Society and Its Enemies” didn’t happen? You cannot run a tolerant society without being intolerant to those that want to destroy it. You are right, that there is too much intolerance in today’s society, but I don’t think that it’s the case here. I think Stallman’s public statements about child rape deserve all the shunning he got.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>Richard Stallman told me of his misery and that he’d kill himself if I didn’t go out with him. I said exactly that many times to girls when I was a teenager. It was a joke. Taken out of context, those phrases can mean anything good or bad.
There is no context in which this is acceptable. It is emotional abuse regardless of whether you consider it a joke. Based on all other anecdotes of RMS' behavior around women, there is zero basis for believing that this was intended for amusement rather than emotional manipulation.
Oh for christ's sake. Have you ever tell a joke to talk to a girl?
There is a conflict here: on one hand we want diversity, accept people with their differences, their handicap or education. On the other hand we want them to behave the same way we do, otherwise we reject them. So your company should have people with handicap, but that have no effect on others. And diverse genders, but you should consider them all the same, even if we know we have diverse bodies, needs and behaviors.…
I would be perfectly fine if a development of a project would be done by strangers behind incognito aliases. I don't care if the contributed code comes from Black woman or Caucasian man or some cat who had learned to code. I believe that it is absolutely irrelevant topic that is forced on the industry by whatever reasons. If is not like the barrier to entry is too high: anyone who can afford a $500 PC and internet can have access to all the learning materials in the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>Richard Stallman told me of his misery and that he’d kill himself if I didn’t go out with him. I said exactly that many times to girls when I was a teenager. It was a joke. Taken out of context, those phrases can mean anything good or bad.
There is no context in which this is acceptable. It is emotional abuse regardless of whether you consider it a joke. Based on all other anecdotes of RMS' behavior around women, there is zero basis for believing that this was intended for amusement rather than emotional manipulation.
I don't think this argument makes sense. In fact if we follow it to its conclusion, it's an additional reason for RMS to be removed from his job. 1. RMS is not being punished by the FSF. He does not have any right to a particular job, even as the founder of an organization. Many people, including FSF board members, believed he was not competent to serve the organization in a leadership role. One could argue about whe…
> 2. RMS is not obviously asking for any understanding nor promising to be better. You can't apologize once there is a mixture of 10% truth and 90% defamation. The libelous press will then print that the target has apologized for 100%, and therefore has validated the libel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no context in which this is acceptable. It is emotional abuse regardless of whether you consider it a joke. Based on all other anecdotes of RMS' behavior around women, there is zero basis for believing that this was intended for amusement rather than emotional manipulation.
>There is no context in which this is acceptable. Oh for christ's sake. Have you ever tell a joke to talk to a girl?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm no fan of Stallman, but I do find it worrying that some companies can unilaterally decide to sink the FSF if they don't like what it's doing. Why? That's like, the entire basis of every organization, that supporters don't have to support it. If a company selling a product behaves in a way you don't want to support you stop buying, if a charity stops supporting a cause you stop supporting it, etc.
The real question is why every single major company in America is vigorously enforcing social norms that significant portions of the population, often a majority, don’t even agree with. This is very different than other eras.