51–60 of 376 posts
https://stallmansupport.org/richard-stallman-commitment-to-s...
Beyond pathetic.
For anyone denying that the "cancel culture" (a big misnomer btw) actually exists - this is a perfect example. At least they could say what the reason is, then this could be addressed somehow - but as it is now it's just mud-smearing.
Anyone have a background summary? Last I heard he kept a mattress in his office and asked people to lay on it, and he had a stupid neutral pronoun idea he was very insistent on using. Has something stranger come up?
He objected to the word "assault" being used to describe Marvin Minsky (allegedly) having sex with one of Jeffrey Epstein's underage victims.
Unlike in most RMS-derailed conversations, this time it sounds like it might've confused the grave allegation in the original conversation, at the same time it compounded outrage.
I'm glad RMS now understands that his ideas around this were mistaken, but I think most people aren't wired quite like he is. He might be thinking some kind of "Oh, it turned out that theory seems incorrect, thank you for correcting me with this information I did not have before". But a lot of people were/are upset, and going to respond in various different ways.
I think RMS's intentions remain principled, and I hope RMS now has advisors to help him function best towards those intentions, including helping him understand how different people will perceive and think about things.
We ll never know what "the situation" is and whatever "statements that do not correspond to any of our values" are. Good job smearing mud without saying anything i guess. Did stallman say something since he was invited that was particularly noticeable? if not then these organizers don't know what they 're doing and this reflects bad on them
>I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.
Is very controversial, even if he backpedalled (only after it resurfaced and created a lot of controversy). I totally get why it wouldn't fit the values of a university
Did Stallman do anything new that offended certain political persuasions, or is this cancellation only due to previous controversies/peculiarities? Edit: the level of downvotes/flag-kills of comments just asking "why" and "what happened" is pretty depressing.
edit Even this comment, which is just listing a series of objective facts, is getting wildly upvoted/downvoted
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Should we shun Bill Gates because of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? In my opinion, yes, absolutely.
I mean, as far as we know, that's what his wife did, right? Or is that just Internet wisdom?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Should we shun Bill Gates because of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? In my opinion, yes, absolutely.
Have you or anyone else been able to confirm the relationship was what you imply it was, or are you advocating guilt by association?
You using the word "guilt" suggests you're venturing into the strawman of "innocent until proven guilty", or that public opinion must follow the same rules as the judicial system.
Even if he didn't do anything illegal, Jeffrey Epstein is gross and awful. It's totally fine for society to not want people "guilty" of associating frequently and voluntarily to be powerful and influential.
Public opinion is not a court.
We ll never know what "the situation" is and whatever "statements that do not correspond to any of our values" are. Good job smearing mud without saying anything i guess. Did stallman say something since he was invited that was particularly noticeable? if not then these organizers don't know what they 're doing and this reflects bad on them
I mean, his statements regarding pedophilia are enough. It's not exactly a hidden secret. Saying stuff like >I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. Is very controversial, even if he backpedalled (only…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, his statements regarding pedophilia are enough. It's not exactly a hidden secret. Saying stuff like >I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. Is very controversial, even if he backpedalled (only…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, his statements regarding pedophilia are enough. It's not exactly a hidden secret. Saying stuff like >I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. Is very controversial, even if he backpedalled (only…
[flagged]