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

Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

polaris64.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 43 posts

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#31

Post by ahelwer »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #30
ahelwer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We aren't talking about prosecution! We are talking about him facing any consequences whatsoever! The idea that you don't view that situation as threatening is just so myopic. People who are unstable enough to threaten suicide because of romantic rejection are a danger to others, not just themselves. Ask a woman, literally any woman you know, about whether they would feel safe in that situation.

I was in such a situation twice. My ex-girlfriend threatened she would kill herself if I leave. Another woman said if I don't stay with her she will likely get very ill. It never ever crossed my mind to inform their employers these women were harassing me. Even if I did (why?!) I don't think it would be fair to fire these women.

Were you also employed or involved at their place of work where they were in a position of authority? No? Then why bring this up? Anyway, we are talking about intermediate consequences.

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#32

Post by zihotki »

ahelwer wrote: post #28
zihotki wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only makes him a weirdo, not more than that. Should he be prosecuted for being weirdo? I doubt so. It was uncomfortable for women but they weren't forced or threatened (remember he was saying he will kill himself, not her/him).

We aren't talking about prosecution! We are talking about him facing any consequences whatsoever! The idea that you don't view that situation as threatening is just so myopic. People who are unstable enough to threaten suicide because of romantic rejection are a danger to others, not just themselves. Ask a woman, literally any woman you know, about whether they would feel safe in that situation.

> People who are unstable enough to threaten suicide because of romantic rejection are a danger to others, not just themselves. For the first, the context (situational, non-verbal, etc.) matters, as it's explained in a number of articles about the subject.

I asked a few (non-representative anecdotal sample) womans (programmers, managers, etc.) around, they all considered it safe unless the person crosses the line and starts stalking or exibit any other kind of oppressive behaviour (coming/staying too close, "accidentally" touching, stealing your belongings, starts looking for a ways to be alone with you).

Everyone of course is different and the same situation could be interpreted differently by different people. Some could even overreact a single glance or intonation therefore we need to draw a line between harrasment and being a weirdo and don't jump to conclusions too early.

From what I currently see (I haven't been there and can judge only by media), the situation has been pushed from personal issue to a political leverage. And this is unacceptable. What could have been done instead? I don't know, may be an open letter from a few persons to ask him to be more polite and/or ask to seek consultation with a psychotherapist? But cancelling is not the way.

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#33

Post by ahelwer »

zihotki wrote: post #32
ahelwer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We aren't talking about prosecution! We are talking about him facing any consequences whatsoever! The idea that you don't view that situation as threatening is just so myopic. People who are unstable enough to threaten suicide because of romantic rejection are a danger to others, not just themselves. Ask a woman, literally any woman you know, about whether they would feel safe in that situation.

> People who are unstable enough to threaten suicide because of romantic rejection are a danger to others, not just themselves. For the first, the context (situational, non-verbal, etc.) matters, as it's explained in a number of articles about the subject. I asked a few (non-representative anecdotal sample) womans (programmers, managers, etc.) around, they all considered it safe unless the person crosses the line and…

Again... we are talking about a long pattern of behavior. The entire point here is that Stallman faced no consequences for that incident! None! Intermediate consequences would have been nice, but none occurred! So here we have the tidal wave finally cresting over the barrier. And your response is to go back and litigate a single specific incident, saying it would have been nice if someone had written an open letter - where even that didn't happen? What kind of culture are you trying to build, exactly? The Free Software movement must include women. Sheltering leaders who sexually harass them goes against that aim. It's too late for Stallman, and protecting him here just tells all those women who were harassed without consequence that the movement does not want them. Just try to fix the process and pick better leaders going forward.

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#34

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

ahelwer wrote: post #31
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in such a situation twice. My ex-girlfriend threatened she would kill herself if I leave. Another woman said if I don't stay with her she will likely get very ill. It never ever crossed my mind to inform their employers these women were harassing me. Even if I did (why?!) I don't think it would be fair to fire these women.

Were you also employed or involved at their place of work where they were in a position of authority? No? Then why bring this up? Anyway, we are talking about intermediate consequences.

Paradoxically, when talking about intermediate consequences, it is Stallman who is a victim here. After two years, the same false accusations are published in all possible media outlets, with no correction of apology.

* Techcrunch: "Computer scientist Richard Stallman, who defended Jeffrey Epstein, resigns from MIT CSAIL and the Free Software Foundation" - where in fact RMS never defended Epstein and just called him a rapist.

* Motherboard: "Famed Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Described Epstein Victims As 'Entirely Willing'" - this being the most sick twist of what he actually said

* The Daily Beast: "Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely Willing’" - here the falsehood reaches new depths

* Daily Mail: "MIT scientist appears to DEFEND Jeffrey Epstein as he claims sex assault victim Virginia Giuffre was 'entirely willing' in alleged rape case in emails leaked by a graduate" - again, anyone who would bother to check the actual email would realize how stupid this is.

The longer these falsehoods are repeated, the more people believe in them.

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#35

Post by ahelwer »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #34
ahelwer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you also employed or involved at their place of work where they were in a position of authority? No? Then why bring this up? Anyway, we are talking about intermediate consequences.

Paradoxically, when talking about intermediate consequences, it is Stallman who is a victim here. After two years, the same false accusations are published in all possible media outlets, with no correction of apology. * Techcrunch: "Computer scientist Richard Stallman, who defended Jeffrey Epstein, resigns from MIT CSAIL and the Free Software Foundation" - where in fact RMS never defended Epstein and just called him…

Okay? Irrelevant to anything we've been talking about here. Go send hatemail to those outlets or something. You seem to have a lot of grievances which ignore the reality that Stallman is utterly unqualified to serve as a leader of a project that purports to advocate for the freedom of all people. Maybe if he had worked to change his behavior over the decades it occurred it would be fine. But he didn't. So here we are.

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#36

Post by zihotki »

ahelwer wrote: post #33
zihotki wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People who are unstable enough to threaten suicide because of romantic rejection are a danger to others, not just themselves. For the first, the context (situational, non-verbal, etc.) matters, as it's explained in a number of articles about the subject. I asked a few (non-representative anecdotal sample) womans (programmers, managers, etc.) around, they all considered it safe unless the person crosses the line and…

Again... we are talking about a long pattern of behavior. The entire point here is that Stallman faced no consequences for that incident! None! Intermediate consequences would have been nice, but none occurred! So here we have the tidal wave finally cresting over the barrier. And your response is to go back and litigate a single specific incident, saying it would have been nice if someone had written an open letter -…

And what makes you think there were no intermediate consequences about that? And what kind of consequences are you expecting? Cancel him out completely? Isn't it too radical? It seems like a standard predator behaviour to me, similar to one attributed to Stallman.

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#37

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

ahelwer wrote: post #35
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paradoxically, when talking about intermediate consequences, it is Stallman who is a victim here. After two years, the same false accusations are published in all possible media outlets, with no correction of apology. * Techcrunch: "Computer scientist Richard Stallman, who defended Jeffrey Epstein, resigns from MIT CSAIL and the Free Software Foundation" - where in fact RMS never defended Epstein and just called him…

Okay? Irrelevant to anything we've been talking about here. Go send hatemail to those outlets or something. You seem to have a lot of grievances which ignore the reality that Stallman is utterly unqualified to serve as a leader of a project that purports to advocate for the freedom of all people. Maybe if he had worked to change his behavior over the decades it occurred it would be fine. But he didn't. So here we are…

No, I don't have many grievances, just one: Stallman was falsely accused in a campaign led by Selam Gano and this false information was spread worldwide. I don't believe in consequentialism. In this case, Selam believed that by destroying Stallman she will somehow protect women in the future. That's perfectly fine, but please use only true arguments, not falsehoods.

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#38

Post by tomxor »

shawnz wrote: post #6
john37386 wrote: post #4

Why is this post not flagged vs this one? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26646048 What is the reasoning at HN for allowing one side of the story and censuring the other side. Very disappointed at HN moderators...

It was posted just minutes ago. Also, flagging is done by users. EDIT: As you can see it's dead now. EDIT: And now it's back.

aaand it's gone again.

It seems like bitcoin and RMS are two impossible topics for HN now.

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#39

Post by [deleted] »

ahelwer wrote: post #10

I've been talking with friends about this issue and it really seems to come down to this: for some reason "intermediate" consequences are just impossible to implement in bureaucracies or organizations in general. Clearly Stallman did some completely unacceptable things and that can't go unpunished. However, like in all organizations I've seen (especially universities or hospitals dealing with sexual harassment from p…

[deleted]

Re: Richard Stallman FSF support/remove letter signature counts

#40

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

ahelwer wrote: post #19
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with the essence of your comment, I find the statement "Clearly Stallman did some completely unacceptable things and that can't go unpunished" is questionable. First, it's not "clearly", because the main argument (that he was defending Epstein) is false. Second, as to "unacceptable", it depends to who and when - certain things that were acceptable 20 years ago are unthinkable now. Third, as for "can't g…

It's way more than the Epstein thing. This has been going on for years. Telling an undergrad he would kill himself if she didn't date him is one example.

So how should we punish him? How long did this evil act take place? Do these actions have statute of limitations? In Massachusetts rape has 15 years SoL, but clearly this is a much more severe offense.
Post reply on HN