51–60 of 110 posts
So this is literally a website dedicated to defending the character of a major figure in the open-source world, and it gets flagged. This is HN - people should be able to make their own judgement on the content of the site and discuss it here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm really trying to understand the issue with the card itself, but the tweet has no further context. Did he only give these out to women? Were they given with other social cues that would indicate he was handing them out as a way to hit on or make a sexual advance towards women? If either of those things are true then I'd understand. But the cards alone look like a business card from a person with a slightly odd sen…
He made people uncomfortable. He was asked to stop. He was reported. He kept doing it. So it's not a "slightly odd sense of humor." It's not humor if no one laughs. If someone tells me something makes them uncomfortable, I stop it.
Now, if the Org he's giving a speech for and giving these out at, doesn't like him doing it and asks him not to but he still does it. then THEY are within their right to eject him.
But no flash outrage social media push has any right to "cancel" the guy because he creeps them out a little.
Just dont take the card. request he leave you alone. He'll either get the message or he wont... if he doesn't then that is harassments. (albeit a very minor sort) but enough to request security/police to step in and communicate more directly to his hind-brain.
Beginning to see some of the arguments that the "right" make about cancel culture... and I a lefty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just wonder why he hasn't updated or amended his website, https://www.google.com/search?q=pedophile+site%3Astallman.or...
That doesn't appear to be his style. And even if he did update or amend old posts, there would still be archives and copies floating around that people could refer to if they felt the need. He has changed his views on some topics over the years, including this: https://stallman.org/archives/2019-sep-dec.html#14_September...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm really trying to understand the issue with the card itself, but the tweet has no further context. Did he only give these out to women? Were they given with other social cues that would indicate he was handing them out as a way to hit on or make a sexual advance towards women? If either of those things are true then I'd understand. But the cards alone look like a business card from a person with a slightly odd sen…
He made people uncomfortable. He was asked to stop. He was reported. He kept doing it. So it's not a "slightly odd sense of humor." It's not humor if no one laughs. If someone tells me something makes them uncomfortable, I stop it.
Who asked him to stop? What specifically was said? When was he reported? When did he keep doing it?
I've heard this allegation multiple times, and have yet to see any proof.
So this is literally a website dedicated to defending the character of a major figure in the open-source world, and it gets flagged. This is HN - people should be able to make their own judgement on the content of the site and discuss it here.
Probably flagged because it's political content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't appear to be his style. And even if he did update or amend old posts, there would still be archives and copies floating around that people could refer to if they felt the need. He has changed his views on some topics over the years, including this: https://stallman.org/archives/2019-sep-dec.html#14_September...
It makes me wonder whether he is sincere in his new position. He could easily add a note to his prior statements in a minute's time. He chooses not to do it. Perhaps he doesn't do it because he doesn't want to change what's been written. To me it comes off as insincere given how easy it is to modify websites. Ultimately, what he does is his choice and how it's perceived is everyone else's.
Somebody who always says what he thinks without giving any thought to how it will be perceived, how it will affect his future relationships with people, his employment etc is probably not the person who will follow Hillary Clinton's lead and have "a public and a private" opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes me wonder whether he is sincere in his new position. He could easily add a note to his prior statements in a minute's time. He chooses not to do it. Perhaps he doesn't do it because he doesn't want to change what's been written. To me it comes off as insincere given how easy it is to modify websites. Ultimately, what he does is his choice and how it's perceived is everyone else's.
> It makes me wonder whether he is sincere in his new position. Somebody who always says what he thinks without giving any thought to how it will be perceived, how it will affect his future relationships with people, his employment etc is probably not the person who will follow Hillary Clinton's lead and have "a public and a private" opinion.
Unbelievable. This site adds insult to injury by defending pedophelia and links it to trans issues. Are they saying that if the latter is ok, the former is also ok? Sounds like it to me. RMS deserves all the rejection he is getting for this sentiment alone, never mind the other charges. > But he did publish a highly controversial comment[2] in 2006 about the intention of pedophiles in The Netherlands to form a politi…
I agree. This "debunking" is simply a defense of Stallman's views on pedophelia. And Stallman's statement is still on his website. Nothing has changed, https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html
Just an observation, the male/female ratio on this support letter is dramatically higher than on the letter pushing for resignation https://rms-open-letter.github.io/