Richard Stallman Resigns From The Free Software Foundation

[leiptrstormr]

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.

[starshipeleven]

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.

[ossuser]

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/

[AsuMagic]

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!

[starshipeleven]

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

[Blahblah]

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?

[Teggs]

So Richard Stallman is gone from his positions after these many years... because he defended the honour of a dead colleague?

And we are supposed to celebrate the power of libel to destroy careers? That power can be used by anyone, against anyone, at any time. Thinking 'I hate this person so badly that the injustice is worth it' is the reasoning of a fool. This actually fulfills the requirements of the overused phrase 'damaging to society'.

This article does detail the commission of a crime. Or two, if you include Epstein. But the other isn't Stallman, it's Vice. And those celebrating should remember that the monster can come also for them.

[wizard69]

I actually think this will be great for the FSF as I never like this guy and the way he drove the FSF and GPL.

However it is pretty disgusting that somebody would loose their job over what is in part a statement of opinion and also fact. The fact is the age of consent varies widely even in the USA. As to the possibility of a forced encounter it is possible but the reality is woman lie about rape and do so often. In fact it has gotten so out of hand that we really need to start prosecuting woman that have done so.

The question here is how do how do you determine whom is telling the truth? I’d have to say there is a lot of embellishment going on here.

In the end I never thought much of Stallman and the way he handled the FSF. However the way his freedom of speech is being trampled is extremely disturbing. I really don’t like the direction society is moving, it is the domain of a police state where thoughts are deemed objectionable.

[AndyChow]

it's horrifying that so many people think "innocent until proven guilty" should apply to rapists, but not to their victims.

You're right, it is horrifying. Most people don't know the facts, the details. If there are accusations, we delegate a special team to try to figure out the truth of it all. And hopefully they figure out the truth of it all.

It's horrifying that people left and right try to, with very limited knowledge, draw conclusions made on what rumor and limited information they have.

Take a couple divorcing. Rumors abound. Did she cheat on him? Did he beat her? No one knows anything. But then someone like RMS asks a question about the details of a theoretical situation. And the mob is so outraged that a question is asked, that he must resign from his life's work.

I'll be honest. I'm biased. I personally interacted with Marvin Minsky. He helped me out when I was young and foolish. I thought greatly of him. Whether it turns out he was a good man or a bad man will be left to the facts. If he turns out to be evil incarnate, I will accept that. But I will not accept that RMS, another man that is biased and was helped by MM, that his career and life's work is destroyed simply because he dared to ask clarification on the facts. That is insane. RMS asked questions, he did not proclaim authority nor judgement. And now he must be destroyed?

I do not agree. I think we can ask as many questions as we want. At least to ourselves and to others online.

[xorbe]

This is why opinions online should only be discussed anonymously. (Here's your more than 100 post!)