Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Richard Stallman Reportedly Steps Down As Head Of The GNU Project

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

  • Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

    Problem is getting fired from project lead role is that you show that there is a high possibly that you could fail todo the job properly. To prove that you may fail to respond to event at company/organisation that you are Project/Company lead at is that you hand any event of the same class incorrectly.



    That says he could not have clearly known.



    That the problem while holding the job titles at the FSF and GNU he is required to act with a particular level of professionalism with these things even for stuff that does not come from GNU/FSF. This unfortunately means in cases like this Richard Stallman was required to bite is tongue and say nothing because of the titles he held.

    Being a project lead/company lead comes great responsibility and some of the requirement of responsible behaviour from those roles effect everything you do while you hold your role.

    This is a fun thing of Disrepute. The hard thing is being a project/company lead is that you can be fired from role for you own safety because you actions outside the company has undermined your reputation to handle the things a project/company lead need todo. Yes people use to be historically fired from these roles for being in disreputable actions outside company this made it clear that the actions outside company brought the person downfall.

    The big thing here is a company/organisation is not require to wait for anyone in a management/project lead role to fail on their own dime to dismiss them all they need to do is prove the possibility with evidence. So like it or not Richard Stallman did exactly what was required to get himself dismissed.

    The requirement on behaviour of company leads/management is over 300 years old. Its the basic principle that you are as project/company lead you are always representing the company/organisation you cannot forgot that if you do don't be surprised if you are either forced to resign or get fired. Lot of people do forget this requirement is there.

    This is one reasons why when you are given a project lead role you should get a higher wage than the average person working on the same project because you are taking a risk that you might get fired for actions that as a normal employee would be harmless.
    That really does not hold well regarding Stallman. He has been an exception to the rule, and I would say a positive exception, like you can see from his homepage and tons of political opinions there. Stallman clearly could have an opinion about anything. But then suddenly could not anymore because of a very toxic hate group attack towards him. Also I know that if my good long died friend is accused of something he did not do and I knew that, I would defend my friend. It would be my honor to do, and I would do it even if the defense would anger some hate groups like what happened to Stallman. I think a brave man is more valuable to the society than a coward.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

      https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...09#post1129609

      You need to read this. This is the problem. He was defending a person who was dead from a possible reported assault.

      The problem here is a project/company lead job include being a judge for things inside the company this required you to remain in good reputation on criminal things that people be willing to report them to you because they know you will take actions on them.

      Part of being paid as a project/company lead including lead management roles is accepting you will be judged on how you respond to crimes this is basically part of the job description. The big pay checks at time for those roles are not for nothing. Sometimes its very hard inside a company to find anyone with a suitable reputation to take up a lead role.

      Remember for a persecution to happen evidence has to be collected. One of the parties that collects evidence on people general behaviour bosses/project leads. There is the requirement that a person in that role does not bias their idea of a person with their personal option instead is able to look at their diary of record events (evidence) and make option from that. Also be smart enough to look at their diary of recorded events and see that there no evidence that proves no guilt and keep mouth shut. Let the person other collages defend him.

      Yes lead doing what they should do can have people under them hate them because they claim they don't have their back.

      The reality is a Lead job is to have the company/organisation back before everyone else. Not everyone can do this.
      Forgot to mention in previous posting that what was the stage or venue for the argument? Was it television? An interview in major newspaper? No, it was a minor mailing list less than 0.01% of the people know of, much less care. So the audience was not huge, it was tiny.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by moilami View Post
        That really does not hold well regarding Stallman. He has been an exception to the rule,
        That been a problem. Being an exception to a rule that has a legal precedent its only a matter of time until that is corrected. Stallman has had a very long run.

        Originally posted by moilami View Post
        and I would say a positive exception, like you can see from his homepage and tons of political opinions there. Stallman clearly could have an opinion about anything.
        All that stuff on his homepage and the like could have been done as just a advocate. That is the job title Stallman should have been given. That means he can still have input like vote at meetings. But day to day operations he does not have final say as an advocate so would not have had the legal restriction on action.

        Originally posted by moilami View Post
        But then suddenly could not anymore because of a very toxic hate group attack towards him.
        It was not sudden. There have been many questions over the decades if Stallman should have stepped out of the management roles. This was not a solitary event of him putting foot in it either. If he had been moved to the right job title the toxic hate groups would have had nothing to work with.

        Originally posted by moilami View Post
        Also I know that if my good long died friend is accused of something he did not do and I knew that, I would defend my friend. It would be my honor to do, and I would do it even if the defense would anger some hate groups like what happened to Stallman.
        I am not going to say Stallman should not be respect for falling on his sword to defend his friend. But we have to accept this is legal responsibilities to be a project/company lead. From what you said you are suitable management role.

        Originally posted by moilami View Post
        I think a brave man is more valuable to the society than a coward.
        Problem is management defines brave differently. You have to be brave enough in management to ride out a storm while you are required to keep you mouth shut and collect evidence proving one way or the other. Its a very hard thing to be a project lead and do it right. You require a very tough skin and the ability to suppress you emotions while you collect facts.

        Originally posted by moilami View Post
        Forgot to mention in previous posting that what was the stage or venue for the argument? Was it television? An interview in major newspaper? No, it was a minor mailing list less than 0.01% of the people know of, much less care. So the audience was not huge, it was tiny.
        Audience size is not critical. The requirement as a Project lead/Management is always act correctly. It does not matter in fact if there is no audience in fact. People have been fired from companies from management position because their superior read over their journal notes and it showed problems in personal logic. So a Audience of 1 is enough to get you fired if they have the evidence from a management role.

        Like it or not Richard Stallman has had the wrong job title and its now caught up with him. I wish he never had those titles because he really was never suitable for them. He could have done all the same things as a advocate/appointed representative to events. Stallman being the representative of FSF/GNU is a title he could keep and him putting foot in it would not be a fire able offence. Being a manager/project lead putting foot in it is a fire able offence.

        The job title you are given is very important at times if you keep your job or not.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by AdrianBc View Post


          While I do not agree with some of the opinions of Stallman, I do not remember of anything he ever said that could be assessed as "toxic behavior".
          Oh? It's pretty common knowledge that he is a pompus douchebag since forever... so dunno how you can possibly deny that you knew about it when everyone else knew. RMS is often portrayed as some sort of FSF deity but the fact is he always held these ideas and while I think there is a lot of leeway that should be granted to people in general as to what they think and how they act as long as they do nothing illegal or that could cause their associates (eg MIT) to come under fire. I'm fairly certain stallman crossed the line many times over the years and until now it has been swept under the rug.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by cb88 View Post
            Oh? It's pretty common knowledge that he is a pompus douchebag since forever... so dunno how you can possibly deny that you knew about it when everyone else knew. RMS is often portrayed as some sort of FSF deity but the fact is he always held these ideas and while I think there is a lot of leeway that should be granted to people in general as to what they think and how they act as long as they do nothing illegal or that could cause their associates (eg MIT) to come under fire. I'm fairly certain stallman crossed the line many times over the years and until now it has been swept under the rug.
            I wish I had the cartoon from when the Fitzgerald Inquiry started in Australia it was a good one. Where stuff had been swept under the rug and the rug was no longer big enough to hide the problem.

            This is the problem with Richard Stallman. He has done more than enough to show he is not suitable for a lead position yet he was not demoted out of lead position.

            Either he was stubborn or the people around he was not clear that he need to change his position. So I have different questions.

            PR people get to be pompus douchebags with almost no restrictions. Management and project leads really have legal restrictions on how much of a pompus douchebag they can be before they risk getting into aiding and abetting crimes issues. People are suitable for different roles.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by IreMinMon View Post

              That's not the way I understood it, might have to go through his entire quote again.
              You say that a couple of 17 year olds having sex is not pedophillia, but what exactly is pedophillia then? I want hard limits. To me, children aren't children anymore when they hit puberty, and it's rather difficult to draw that line, especially with boys. "Age of consent" goes as low as 15 in some countries, should all developers from these countries be banned from contributing?
              First you have to understand that sex with younger kids especially with adults is not illegal because of "pedophilia" "pedophilia" is not even a act it's similar (but of course way more harmful) than people that are gay, it's not a choice like it's no choice to be gay. But they can decide to act on it or not. (pedophiles not gays)

              On the other hand even if a person has sex with a 8 year girl or boy doesn't make him a pedophile, it's not the act that makes you that, it's if you exclusively get aroused by pre-puberty children.

              So most rapes on children are not done by pedophiles. The problems with kids is that they often are easy targets, therefor a well I have problems with the term rapist, because just because a person rapes 1 time in his live a person maybe even drunk doesn't define a person as a rapist. That's like saying if you work once as a prostitute we can call you a whore even 30 years you quit the business and worked somewhere else.., but that aside if I use the word, a rapist therefor chooses a child not because he only can get off with them.

              And then you say that a couple of 17 year old having sex... that implies it's only not pedophilia because both are at the same age but that is not true, if it willing sex theoretically a 70 year old man can have sex with a 17 year old.or 16 year old girl or the other way around (or homosexual).

              So take Germany theoretically the age of consent is at 14 years that is the "hard line" but even that has exceptions if the "offender" itself is below 14 he will not be persecuted, so more or less for them it's legal, but generally speaking 12 is the age when you can get judged (with a special law system for the youth). I am not sure what that means for 12 or 13 year olds when they have sex with 7 year olds, or even babies or something. I think then they would get a penalty for rape, because if you can't speak as example you cannot consent in any way. But that is only a speculation below 12 you basically get away with everything, and maybe your parents give you house arrest or they send you to a therapy but no judge rules over 11 year olds.

              But 14 year old have sex with another 14 year old is legal (as long as nobody records it). There are probably some other details but theoretically 50 year olds can have sex with 14 year olds and it's not that untypical than 14 year olds have a friend that is 17 or 18 and then has a car or sometimes 21 (even that age doesn't' mean much here 18 is a full adult).

              But well some expert can go maybe in more details of the German system here, but the major point I wanted to make is that pedophilia in itself is nothing you can blame somebody for, it's no choice the act of raping children that is what you can blame people for and the majority of the offender that do that are not pedophile.

              I have even much respect for pedophile that keep it together and don't act on their sexual orientation.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by oiaohm View Post
                PR people get to be pompus douchebags with almost no restrictions.
                So do people on forums, but whatever.

                I used to think facts mattered to discussions like this. Opinions are like gods now-- all-powerful, all-knowing, and of greater importance than anything. Of course they're jealous, scheming, self-important gods. Gods worth mocking. But a few new blasphemy laws here, a few changes to the constitution there, and we will have a new theocracy centred around worshiping narcissists. Won't that make the world a better place?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by fsfhfc2018 View Post
                  So do people on forums, but whatever.
                  Those in management roles commenting on forums still do have to watch what they say. PR people are normally the ones writing on forums as they get away with a lot more.

                  Originally posted by fsfhfc2018 View Post
                  I used to think facts mattered to discussions like this. Opinions are like gods now-- all-powerful, all-knowing, and of greater importance than anything. Of course they're jealous, scheming, self-important gods. Gods worth mocking. But a few new blasphemy laws here, a few changes to the constitution there, and we will have a new theocracy centred around worshiping narcissists. Won't that make the world a better place?
                  In the end facts matter. Humans always in the short term like optinions guide them.

                  The facts of this matter Richard Stallman had job titles that meant he was require to behave a particular way and he did not. With Richard Stallman track record he most likely should have been removed from those positions over 2 decades ago put in PR or some other title. If he had of he would not be fired now.

                  Its really dangerous to let yourself to be promoted to point of incompetence.

                  Its really simple to let in a Richard Stallman case to go hey people were out to get him that is why he was fired. This allows you to disregard that he had job title and in fact jobs he was being paid for that had legal requirements on behaviour to keep those titles. Really Richard Stallman has been done a serous harm because people ignored his issue.

                  Its like Linus and his bad language. If Linus Torvalds did not improve his language with Australia laws tightening on verbal/written abuse he would not have been able to come here to one of the major Linux world conferences without risking being jailed.

                  There have been a lot of things that have been happening in the FOSS world that reality have simply not been legal. The law is slowly catching up with FOSS and the Internet.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by blackiwid View Post

                    First you have to understand that sex with younger kids especially with adults is not illegal because of "pedophilia" "pedophilia" is not even a act it's similar (but of course way more harmful) than people that are gay, it's not a choice like it's no choice to be gay. But they can decide to act on it or not. (pedophiles not gays)

                    On the other hand even if a person has sex with a 8 year girl or boy doesn't make him a pedophile, it's not the act that makes you that, it's if you exclusively get aroused by pre-puberty children.

                    So most rapes on children are not done by pedophiles. The problems with kids is that they often are easy targets, therefor a well I have problems with the term rapist, because just because a person rapes 1 time in his live a person maybe even drunk doesn't define a person as a rapist. That's like saying if you work once as a prostitute we can call you a whore even 30 years you quit the business and worked somewhere else.., but that aside if I use the word, a rapist therefor chooses a child not because he only can get off with them.

                    And then you say that a couple of 17 year old having sex... that implies it's only not pedophilia because both are at the same age but that is not true, if it willing sex theoretically a 70 year old man can have sex with a 17 year old.or 16 year old girl or the other way around (or homosexual).

                    So take Germany theoretically the age of consent is at 14 years that is the "hard line" but even that has exceptions if the "offender" itself is below 14 he will not be persecuted, so more or less for them it's legal, but generally speaking 12 is the age when you can get judged (with a special law system for the youth). I am not sure what that means for 12 or 13 year olds when they have sex with 7 year olds, or even babies or something. I think then they would get a penalty for rape, because if you can't speak as example you cannot consent in any way. But that is only a speculation below 12 you basically get away with everything, and maybe your parents give you house arrest or they send you to a therapy but no judge rules over 11 year olds.

                    But 14 year old have sex with another 14 year old is legal (as long as nobody records it). There are probably some other details but theoretically 50 year olds can have sex with 14 year olds and it's not that untypical than 14 year olds have a friend that is 17 or 18 and then has a car or sometimes 21 (even that age doesn't' mean much here 18 is a full adult).

                    But well some expert can go maybe in more details of the German system here, but the major point I wanted to make is that pedophilia in itself is nothing you can blame somebody for, it's no choice the act of raping children that is what you can blame people for and the majority of the offender that do that are not pedophile.

                    I have even much respect for pedophile that keep it together and don't act on their sexual orientation.
                    It only takes one for time a victim to be raped, and in that one time you've become a rapist PERIOD there is no oh, my bad I only did it once and wont do it again or excuse for being drunk... sheesh. They have to live with what you did, and so should you.

                    If you don't think you can control yourself when drunk or might do something heinous like this DONT GET DRUNK.


                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by cb88 View Post

                      Yes stallman is guilty of toxic behavior... is he practically the poster child for toxic behavior. At multiple levels even. So no this is not some SJW witch hunt... its just him finally getting what is due despite years of his position and fame holding it back.

                      Pure dishonesty. This same post-rationalization is made for everyone the US media witch-hunts. If this were true, then where were you the last 30 years he's been working with the GNU project?

                      I suppose it's a coincidence that he is stepping down a week after Vice (and every other news site) posted sliced-and-diced quotes from him. Yup, it's his "toxic behavior" that apparently everyone knew about but independently decided not to act upon until know.

                      Edit : Reading these comments, my pessimism for the future is rapidly growing. Apparently, we are at a point in western culture where people do not understand the difference between defending someone from an accusation, and condoning the contents of the accusation itself. People are running out of fainting couches over the fact he is defending someone he knew personally knew from a rape accusation.

                      There seems to be a consensus that those who need a good reputation shouldn't defend someone like this...why? Should the socially influential only ever participate in the accusing-side? Why do lawyers even exist if disbelief in accusations is some mortal sin?

                      To make matters worse, there's witness testimony that Minsky didn't even sleep with the girl, meaning that Stallman's faith in Minsky was almost certainly correct. Oh, but it's not the fact he was right/wrong, it's the fact he decided talk back at all. He should have just known that people participating in technical projects would have a knee-jerk reaction. Essentially, he should have replied to the other faculty members as if he were dealing emotional children instead of functioning adults.
                      Last edited by Blahblah; 09-29-2019, 10:57 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X