EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

Post by [deleted] » Mon, May 15, 2023, 10:44 PM UTC

snvzz wrote: post #44

sokoloff wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many factually accurate statements that are, nevertheless, inappropriate to wildly inappropriate under the circumstances. I have personally interacted with rms decades ago and have a generally positive impression of his entire body of contributions to computing. Nevertheless, reading the controversies section on the wikipedia page induces a combination of cringing and face-palming. Someone researching the s…

>Someone commenting in apparent defense of a convicted sex offender should not make that exact same claim, whether factually correct or not. RMS simply kept faith on someone he knew and respected personally (not Epstein!), in the face of accusations he did not believe to be true[0]. 0. https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-agai...

Post by bjornasm » Mon, May 15, 2023, 10:50 PM UTC

lostmsu wrote: post #58

mardifoufs wrote: post #54

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]

Post by [deleted] » Mon, May 15, 2023, 10:50 PM UTC

kweingar wrote: post #50

snvzz wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The arguments in the character assassination campaign were found baseless[0][1][2]. But the cancelation crowd's witch hunt continues even today. [0] https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-agai... [1] https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stal... [2] https://itsfoss.com/richard-stallman-controversy/

I know the things he said, the context he said them in, and the reasons he might have said them, and I still find it appalling. There were some headlines that took some of the quotes out of context, but that doesn't mean that what he said was ok.

Post by snvzz » Mon, May 15, 2023, 10:51 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #47

snvzz wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Someone commenting in apparent defense of a convicted sex offender should not make that exact same claim, whether factually correct or not. RMS simply kept faith on someone he knew and respected personally (not Epstein!), in the face of accusations he did not believe to be true[0]. 0. https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-agai...

I don't know if rms knew Cody Wilson personally and respected him or not, but he doesn't make that claim in his text: https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-jul-oct.html#23_Septe...

Post by busterarm » Mon, May 15, 2023, 10:52 PM UTC

alex_lav wrote: post #55

tivert wrote: post #21

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.

HN is pretty divided about Stallman. Bringing up the things he actually at one time said, even if later he said something different, results in a lot of downvoting and toxicity. You can't talk about him without it devolving into binary thinking and binary debates. Same as everything else in 2023 I guess. edit Even this comment, which is just listing a series of objective facts, is getting wildly upvoted/downvoted