Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Richard Stallman Resigns From The Free Software Foundation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Blahblah
    replied
    Originally posted by AsuMagic View Post
    Today on phoronix forums:
    • Defending someone who claims pedophilia is OK is perfectly reasonable because the movement matters more and it's just a very decent opinion anyway. Pretending otherwise is disgusting political correctness.
    • There is no way someone saying he thinks pedophilia is not OK anymore is being dishonest after being pressured to resign for views on pedophilia.
    • Said person of course resigned exclusively because of false claims.
    • There is nothing else than the recent quotes that he is being accused of. Nothing. Shoo.
    • Debating around 17 years olds when the subject is about raping children. Arguing as to whether it should be called rape or not.
    • Murderers are okay to have in the community, too!
    • Gnome bad.
    • Debianxfce shitposting. Ironically, probably some of the less horrible comments around.
    • Conspiracy sprinkled around the thread. Who exactly is being accused is left as an exercise to the reader.
    When you think they cannot reach a new low, it always will prove you wrong!

    Here's something people like you don't understand : agreeing with someone in one subject does not mean you agree with every single thing they have ever said in their life.

    Additionally, consider that other people don't agree with his pedophilia arguments, but believe that university professors should be allowed to have controversial opinions. Think about it; if a professor at a university that receives boat-loads of public grant money (despite being private) can't even hold controversial opinions, then who can? Essentially, controversial opinions are exclusively allowed for mega-millionaires after that point, because anybody who has to work for a living is screwed. Do you not see the irony here?

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by AsuMagic View Post
    Today on phoronix forums:
    • Defending someone who claims pedophilia is OK is perfectly reasonable because the movement matters more and it's just a very decent opinion anyway. Pretending otherwise is disgusting political correctness.
    • There is no way someone saying he thinks pedophilia is not OK anymore is being dishonest after being pressured to resign for views on pedophilia.
    • Said person of course resigned exclusively because of false claims.
    • There is nothing else than the recent quotes that he is being accused of. Nothing. Shoo.
    • Debating around 17 years old when the subject is raping children. Arguing as to whether it should be called rape or not.
    • Murderers are okay to have in the community, too!
    • Gnome bad.
    • Debianxfce shitposting. Ironically, probably some of the less horrible comments around.
    • Conspiracy sprinkled around the thread. The laziness has gone so high that they haven't bothered pointing out at who exactly (other than GNOME foundation members)... But they know.
    When you think they cannot reach a new low, it always will prove you wrong!
    Hmm, that list lacks "random memes posted".

    Also answering questions you didn't ask

    Leave a comment:


  • AsuMagic
    replied
    Today on phoronix forums:
    • Defending someone who claims pedophilia is OK is perfectly reasonable because the movement matters more and it's just a very decent opinion anyway. Pretending otherwise is disgusting political correctness.
    • There is no way someone saying he thinks pedophilia is not OK anymore is being dishonest after being pressured to resign for views on pedophilia.
    • Said person of course resigned exclusively because of false claims.
    • There is nothing else than the recent quotes that he is being accused of. Nothing. Shoo.
    • Debating around 17 years olds when the subject is about raping children. Arguing as to whether it should be called rape or not.
    • Murderers are okay to have in the community, too!
    • Gnome bad.
    • Debianxfce shitposting. Ironically, probably some of the less horrible comments around.
    • Conspiracy sprinkled around the thread. Who exactly is being accused is left as an exercise to the reader.
    When you think they cannot reach a new low, it always will prove you wrong!
    Last edited by AsuMagic; 17 September 2019, 06:26 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ossuser
    replied
    And again I ask myself (with the same tinfoil hat senses tingling as starshipeleven) WHO BENEFITS ? (from having RMS out of the way) https://itsfoss.com/richard-stallman-controversy/

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy View Post
    Maybe someone should say this just so it is said: To call it "rape" when a couple of 17 and 19 have sex together is not only completely moronic but more than a slap in the face of every person who has actually suffered this unspeakable life destroying crime and then asks themselves because of this comparison if people are actually taking their incredible suffering serious when they mix it into one pot with completely different things that are worlds apart. People who use that word in any other context other that that actual crime are just disgusting!
    Some states do have some allowances in the law to let that unspeakable dirty thing happen between teenagers without being automatically a crime.

    Like Italy. If I remember correctly it should be something like "if both are less than 25 and older than 15, and there is less than X years of difference between the two it's ok". More complex than this, but that's a tl;dr. Don't quote me on that, I'm not a lawyer.

    Leave a comment:


  • leiptrstormr
    replied
    Virginia Giuffre is 35 in 2019. The incident happened in 2002. She would have become 18 that year. Legal ages of consent are 17 in New York where Epstein lived and 16 in Massachusetts. Even if Minsky did have sex with the girl, which Stallman said he didn't, it would have been 100% legal. Before someone chimes in with Romeo and Juliet laws, that's below legal age of consent. They literally shamed the guy into resigning OVER NOTHING.

    Leave a comment:


  • ZeroPointEnergy
    replied
    Originally posted by Vistaus View Post

    Each state has different laws.

    I wasn't raised in the USA either, but just like in the USA, in my country it's common to define anyone under the age of 18 as a child.
    Maybe someone should say this just so it is said: To call it "rape" when a couple of 17 and 19 have sex together is not only completely moronic but more than a slap in the face of every person who has actually suffered this unspeakable life destroying crime and then asks themselves because of this comparison if people are actually taking their incredible suffering serious when they mix it into one pot with completely different things that are worlds apart. People who use that word in any other context other that that actual crime are just disgusting!

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by willmore View Post
    What rapist and what victim are we talking about here? From the subject it would seem the supposed rapist would be Minsky and the supposed victim would be Virginia Giuffre. The problem with that is neigher does Ms. Giuffre claim to have had sex with Mr. Minsky (I've been searching and I can't find any transcript where she says that). And we have a witness saying that Mr. Minsky turned Ms. Giuffre down when she propositioned him.
    Are you saying stuff got blown out of proportion by Facebook moms and other parties without any kind of proof of their accusations?

    Shocked. I'm shocked, I tell you.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    I haven't been following Stallman closely, but my tinfoil hat senses are tingling. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that this is just a scheduled meltdown ordered by some organization (whatever strikes your fancy) to get him to step down because of a "plausible" reason.

    Originally posted by sarmad View Post
    This is very confusing, at least for someone like me who wasn't raised in North America. According to the news the lady was 17, so why are people calling her a child?
    Because it makes the argument more polarizing I guess. A 17 yo is a teenager, or a "minor". Calling that a "child" is pushing it.

    More seriously, whoever thinks discussing underage sex in any context, in the current times is a moron and deserves to be burned at the stake by frenzied SJWs.

    That's one of the main topics that TRIGGERS that kind of idiots, among with animal abuse and having any opinion about LGBTQ (non-straight) people.
    Last edited by starshipeleven; 17 September 2019, 05:40 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • tuxd3v
    replied
    Originally posted by ThoreauHD View Post
    He took the libertarian contract and overlayed it on to people too stupid to negotiate a meal or clothes, much less a contract. Which then led to a 'Epstein did nothing wrong' conclusion. Meanwhile heads are rolling at MIT and Harvard just for taking a grant from the guy.

    He F'ed up. That's not how Libertarianism works. Freedom + "Responsibility" does not apply to kids of any mammalian species.
    I think you right..
    A big lack of Experience or Society Bounder Limits in a Juvenile, prevent him from acquire several Limits and/or Responsibilities..
    I don't find a reason for him, to say otherwise..

    But I don't think that MIT/Harvard guys are innocent( because they took his words as something granted.. ), they are adults,
    And so, they are subjected to the Bounder Limits of our Society..

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X