Richard Stallman character assassination

[bodefuceta]

I only see updates due to broken links. You're just full of shit. Here's a 2004 version of the page.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

As far as I know, Stallman doesn't typically retract his political views from his personal page fwiw.

That entire section is afaik automatically handled using a script anyway, not by the manual HTML editing he otherwise does on his site.

 

[yuyuyup]

I only see updates due to broken links. You're just full of shit. Here's a 2004 version of the page.

So what's your point? in 2018, he clearly wanted his 2003 page to reflect accuracy. He CARES about his content from all the way back in 2003. But he's willing to let THAT stick around with no change? Thank you for the rapid responses, but please take a minute and find the correction that I asked for ROFLMAO

 

[bodefuceta]

So what's your point? in 2018, he clearly wanted his 2003 page to reflect accuracy.

That's the whole point. The page accurately describes what he wrote in 2003, it's an archive.

 

[yuyuyup]

That's the whole point. The page accurately describes what he wrote in 2003, it's an archive.

Right.... an archive that he wanted to keep up-to-date, with up-to-date links, so when people go back to see his content, they can see the sources he's referring to. He CLEARLY intended for his own blog to be scrutinized, at least for fixing broken links. And you think things like his views on sex crimes don't deserve to be amended, even though you INSIST (with zero proof ROFLMAO) that he changed his position.

 

[bodefuceta]

Right.... an archive that he wanted to keep up-to-date, with up-to-date links, so when people go back to see his content, they can see the sources he's referring to. He CLEARLY intended for his own blog to be scrutinized, at least for fixing broken links. And you think things like his views on sex crimes don't deserve to be amended, even though you INSIST (with zero proof ROFLMAO) that he changed his position.

What, how? I'm just saying he wrote it himself. Is the concept of an archive too hard for you to understand? Perhaps you think if he edited something it'd just disappear from the internet, so you'd do it yourself and are puzzled by him not doing it? Or perhaps you're some sort of radically politized individual who's just ready to lay accusations and undermine anyone who one day wrote something you don't like?

 

[Ev1l0rd]

I see you're only 19 years old. I saw the birth of free software myself, and to me it's clear that the very opposite is true, it's a perception that came from experience. I understand you think this way but make sure you listen closely to the elders. Not me, I'm just some random person on the internet. But the actual people with vast experience. RMS and others had balls of steel and that's what it took for GNU/Linux to even be usable. The people who just randomly attack others on twitter and never produce useful stuff aren't humanity's best friends, even if they cater to your young person or queer or whatever's feelings.

What about the numerous (current and former) FSF staff members who all made statements to the extent of "yes, FOSS is good, yes the FSF is good, but it's in spite of Stallman, not because of him"? I've linked/reposted a HN comment below that links to a large number of these.

If I go by your assumption of "listen to your elders" (ignoring my personal objections to the idea that age gives you automatically more weight on an argument), then surely those that have directly engaged with Stallman and are both former and current active advocates for the FSF and FOSS in general should carry the most weight in a situation to determine whether Stallman supports their cause or not?

It's those opinions specifically, as well as my own research into Stallmans behavior ever since the rank pulling on glibc occurred that led me to determine at least my own conclusion: That Stallman does the FSF/GNU more harm than good.

I'll make clear, he certainly was important in it's early days, but mentalities and the world have changed over the past couple decades and Stallman seems to want to cling to his old mentalities rather than adjust to the rest of the world, which means that at least from my perspective means his consistent behavior (which I characterized like a teenager before and I'll stick with that) is limiting the ability of the FSF to spread its message and generally leads to FOSS being seen as a second rank by most people compared to proprietary software, which really is a shame because the potential of FOSS could be so much more, but up until yesterday was almost solely focused around the views and opinions of one individual. The FSF removing Stallman would mean that FOSS is no longer as strongly tied to Stallman, which hopefully will mean that it becomes easier to give FOSS the first rank spot it deserves (not that there aren't many other issues with FOSS teams, but Stallman was easily the most prolific one.)

Former board member https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html & https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1172293871109320704

Founder of FSF's GPL Compliance Labs https://twitter.com/NovalisDMT/status/1172573166956437505

Former FSF staff https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1173788445732462593

FSF member since 2004 https://twitter.com/downey/status/1172328679889756162 Other members https://twitter.com/dustyweb/status/1173690170090168320 & https://twitter.com/j00bar/status/1172309099410669568

Free Software Conservancy https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-spea...

Senior staff technologist at EFF https://twitter.com/cooperq/status/1173789555993956352

Forbes writer and "FOSS advocate" https://twitter.com/killyourfm/status/1173014344973598722

Director of community for DIAL Community (part of the Open Source Center at the UN Foundation) https://twitter.com/cooperq/status/1173789555993956352

Tech author https://twitter.com/mwlauthor/status/1173690259277848576

[Not sure how to describe Sarah Jeong briefly] https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/561785170538553344

Quote block above sourced to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21000374

 

[bodefuceta]

I'll make clear, he certainly was important in it's early days, but mentalities and the world have changed over the past couple decades and Stallman seems to want to cling to his old mentalities rather than adjust to the rest of the world

I think this is a central point what you're saying and commend you for mentioning it, though it's just completely wrong, the mentalities are exactly the same, only the way to show it changed. Honestly, it entails a deep philosophical introspection, and I'm just an "old" engineer with english as third language, on a game forum of all places. Normally I'd suggest you read up on some author like Mario Ferreira dos Santos but not even sure if it's translated. I wish I could help more and suggest you take this thought and search elsewhere.

 

[yuyuyup]

What, how? I'm just saying he wrote it himself. Is the concept of an archive too hard for you to understand? Perhaps you think if he edited something it'd just disappear from the internet, so you'd do it yourself and are puzzled by him not doing it? Or perhaps you're some sort of radically politized individual who's just ready to lay accusations and undermine anyone who one day wrote something you don't like?

Okeydokey, let's examine that link:

Sex between an adult and a child is wrong)

Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it.

Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why.

ok well first off that "correction" was made AFTER the blog post was pointed out. Well gee, how convenient.

Second off, actually reading that 2003 link, he says a BUNCH of fun stuff that he failed to address in his defense of himself; in that 2003 link (that YOU provided, by the way) he suggests that INCEST should be LEGAL ROFLMAO.

All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness. Some rules might be called for when these acts directly affect other people's interests. For incest, contraception could be mandatory to avoid risk of inbreeding.

ALL OF THESE ACTS SHOULD BE LEGAL. HMMMMMMM he didn't really address THAT in his hilarious "defense" of himself. So, basically, great job defending an incest guy.

 

[Joom]

So, basically, great job defending an incest guy.

And you're imposing your morality here, and totally missed the point. Morality, unfortunately for you, isn't subjective. You're also throwing strawmen around like confetti. If you're gonna be a morality troll, you're gonna have to do better than this.

 

[yuyuyup]

And you're imposing your morality here, and totally missed the point. Morality, unfortunately for you, isn't subjective. You're also throwing strawmen around like confetti. If you're gonna be a morality troll, you're gonna have to do better than this.

"Imposing your morality here." Really? I'm not really sure I'm going out on a limb to say that incest is universally accepted as horrifically WRONG. If you want to go down that road, by all means, tell me how incest is defensible. I'm not asking much to ask what the man's current position on incest is, considering 15 years ago he was just fine with it (according to his blog at least ROFLMAO)

 

[Ev1l0rd]

And you're imposing your morality here, and totally missed the point. Morality, unfortunately for you, isn't subjective. You're also throwing strawmen around like confetti. If you're gonna be a morality troll, you're gonna have to do better than this.

Uh... Morality is by it's very design subjective. It's the values we impose on the world around us, which is influenced by our upbringing, the society we live in and those around us.

That said, there's some shit that's universally fucked up. In the topically relevant situation; incest is nigh universally seen as wrong in Western culture (unless you're from Alabama), also if we're on stallman anyway, the same can be said for bestiality and necrophilia. (again, unless you're from Alabama.)

So is this imposing morality? Yes. But the mere existence on laws on these matters are imposing morality. Which is a good thing. Without laws we'd fall into anarchy.

 

[Xzi]

I can sympathize with both sides of this conflict to some extent, but c'mon, why would you defend Epstein or anyone associated with him? He's reviled by absolutely everybody, across all political lines. Autistic or not, people in the public sphere should have a bit more common sense than that.

 

[bodefuceta]

Former board member https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html & https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1172293871109320704

Founder of FSF's GPL Compliance Labs https://twitter.com/NovalisDMT/status/1172573166956437505

Former FSF staff https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1173788445732462593

FSF member since 2004 https://twitter.com/downey/status/1172328679889756162 Other members https://twitter.com/dustyweb/status/1173690170090168320 & https://twitter.com/j00bar/status/1172309099410669568

Free Software Conservancy https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-spea...

Senior staff technologist at EFF https://twitter.com/cooperq/status/1173789555993956352

Forbes writer and "FOSS advocate" https://twitter.com/killyourfm/status/1173014344973598722

Director of community for DIAL Community (part of the Open Source Center at the UN Foundation) https://twitter.com/cooperq/status/1173789555993956352

Tech author https://twitter.com/mwlauthor/status/1173690259277848576

[Not sure how to describe Sarah Jeong briefly] https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/561785170538553344

Only now I took my time to look into this and, I am totally not surprised. Twitter is a cesspool of degenerates, where valid concerns are suppressed and madness spreads like wildfire, besides it's proprietary software. Seriously, it's no wonder people have this sort of opinion when they use Twitter as a source of information on the general public. If you actually want to read what people think, use mailing lists.

I can sympathize with both sides of this conflict to some extent, but c'mon, why would you defend Epstein or anyone associated with him? He's reviled by absolutely everybody, across all political lines. Autistic or not, people in the public sphere should have a bit more common sense than that.

Are you talking about rms?

 

[Ev1l0rd]

Only now I took my time to look into this and, I am totally not surprised. Twitter is a cesspool of degenerates, where valid concerns are suppressed and madness spreads like wildfire, besides it's proprietary software. Seriously, it's no wonder people have this sort of opinion when they use Twitter as a source of information on the general public. If you actually want to read what people think, use mailing lists.

So... you're dismissing concerns posted by active and former FSF members just because they posted about it on Twitter?

Like, sure, we can ditch the journalists and Sarah Jeong here (since quite frankly, I only included these so I wouldn't be accused of citing the comment out of context). That still leaves several FSF members, the DIAL Community director, a member of the EFF, a former FSF board member and the Free Software Conservancy speaking up about this.

 

[bodefuceta]

So... you're dismissing concerns posted by active and former FSF members just because they posted about it on Twitter?

Do you realize how trivial it is to get FSF membership? I am dismissing them because they are degenerate nutjobs, the kind of people you find when searching up something on twitter. Twitter itself is incompatible with FSF's ideas. It's obvious any FSF member using it is a bad apple.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

Do you realize how trivial it is to get FSF membership? I am dismissing them because they are degenerate nutjobs, the kind of people you find when searching up something on twitter.

The Free Software Conservancy (who didn't post on Twitter), the former FSF board member (who did also post about it on his personal blog) and at least a number of the complaining members have been around for a while.

It'd be a different situation if they say... signed up a month ago on the FSF to force him out, but the overwhelming majority of people complaining seem to have been around for several years.

I'll also point out that the decision to remove Stallman was done by the FSF board, which seems to be not as trivial to get into, which means that those who voted on it must have agreed with the assessment of their members.

Somewhat related: Red Hat, the company behind Fedora, RHEL, the biggest contributor to GNOME and so on has issued it's support for finding a replacement for Stallman.

--
Also, please don't use Nazi analogies to refer to real people (the term originates from Entartete Kunst, a strategy used by the Nazis to row people up against modernist art).

 

[bodefuceta]

Wow, that's so many people, that means your argument can't be wrong. Millions of people are talking about it, do you unironically believe in what you're writing anymore?

I know who IBM is.

decision to remove Stallman was done by the FSF board

Source?

Also, please don't use Nazi analogies to refer to real people (the term originates from Entartete Kunst, a strategy used by the Nazis to row people up against modernist art).

And we've finally reached Godwin's law. Because I used a word derived from ancient latin.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

Wow, that's so many people, that means your argument can't be wrong. Millions of people are talking about it, do you unironically believe in what you're writing anymore?

You seem to have overlooked that this is within regards to the "respect and listen to your elders" argument (which you made by the way). Well, I found some elders. Multiple even.

Then you just casually dismiss all of them based on the fact they post to Twitter.

Source?

FSF bylaws: https://static.fsf.org/nosvn/fsf-amended-bylaws-current.pdf

The behavior of the FSFs board is dictated by these bylaws. Article VI, Section 7. There's procedures there for removing the sitting president of the FSF, as well as the procedure for removing the other board members. Long story short: It must be put up to a majority vote by all sitting directors.

There's procedures for these things.

And we've finally reached Godwin's law. Because I used a word derived from ancient latin.

Uhm no? I never compared you to the Nazis. I asked you to stop using a word that made popular by them and the majority of it's nowaday use on folks is closely associated with either the alt-right or anime culture, and I doubt you're referring to the latter.

 

[bodefuceta]

You seem to have overlooked that this is within regards to the "respect and listen to your elders" argument (which you made by the way). Well, I found some elders. Multiple even.

I don't think I told you to listen only to the people who say stuff you want them to and ignore those who understand of the subject at hand.

Then you just casually dismiss all of them based on the fact they post to Twitter.

That's not the full explanation I gave you.

FSF bylaws: https://static.fsf.org/nosvn/fsf-amended-bylaws-current.pdf

The behavior of the FSFs board is dictated by these bylaws. Article VI, Section 7. There's procedures there for removing the sitting president of the FSF, as well as all other board members. Long story short: It must be put up to a majority vote.

There's procedures for these things.

He resigned. This is some ridiculous stretch.

Uhm no? I never compared you to the Nazis.

Yeah, compared my words to nazis, 100% different things.

I'm not your father so you can spew whatever comes through your teenage head and expect an intelligent answer just to help your mental growth. Good bye.