@mattl That website has at least one glaring lie on it.
> He directly addressed child pornography by saying that “making such photos should be a crime, and is a crime, but that is no reason to prohibit possessing copies of the photos.”
If you follow the link, the case is explicitly about cartoon drawings. I have no opinion on the matter, but at least fix the lie.
He very obviously isn't: https://web.archive.org/web/20181022140126/https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html. Respects people who are non-binary clearly.
@mattl His comments on the Epstein situation were vary clearly taken out of context.
> “Headlines say that I defended Epstein. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve called him a ‘serial rapist’, and said he deserved to be imprisoned. But many people now believe I defended him — and other inaccurate claims — and feel a real hurt because of what they believe I said.
> “I’m sorry for that hurt,” he wrote. “I wish I could have prevented the misunderstanding.”
The link might be wrong but there are many proofs that he in fact does believe that child pornography should not be banned.
See (warning, disgusting comments) :
> He very obviously isn't: https://web.archive.org/web/20181022140126/https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html. Respects people who are non-binary clearly.
It also mandates you use certain pronouns. No, it does not respect non-binaries. Also, non-binary people are not trans nor vice-versa.
I have a hard time piecing together Stallman's views from the links you posted. The first link is very clearly not defending CP. The US uses the excuse of terrorism to invade the privacy of US citizens. Now they want to use the pretense of CP. That is what he is saying.
It is hard to understand his positions since the links are just random notes over time, and I have read all the one you linked and the article linked.
> Using everyone's (made-up) pronouns doesn't scale. It is better to come up with a 4th set of pronouns (he, she, they) like Stallman said.
People can simply sign off with their pronouns. Furthermore, you should not get to decide what pronouns someone wants to have. If you do, you cannot say that you care about those people.
> The first link is very clearly not defending CP.
Quote from that link :
"Some works are disgusting, but censorship is more disgusting."
@mattl I am honestly disgusted reading this. You have nothing but hate in yourself. You state clear lies. He is not transphobic either.
I can honestly only wonder how you can look into the mirror.
I do not think I need anything to all the comments clearly marking your claims of his "crimes" taken out of context.
If you want to criticize him, then criticise him for things he has actually done.
@mattl wow.. I'm so disappointed in so many people that I hold in very high regard that apparently signed that petition. I still think this shouldn't be how you get someone to resign. If you have an issue at your workplace, talk it out. Especially now that mr. Stallman is "just" a member of the board. You want people that don't even know the man to decide on his future?
This is just sad.
@mattl I personally find it very odd that this letter is only signed by Debian and OSI people and nobody actually involved with the FSF or GNU projects.
Disgusting. I don't agree with his opinions but he should be allowed to have them like anyone else. You want to cancel and get him kicked out of the foundation *he started* just because you don't like his opinions?
Even mastodon itself wouldn't exist if it wasn't for RMS. Sad he has to be abused this way after all the work he put over the last
Things like this make me want to drop out of FOSS and not spend another minute contributing
In order of fuckwittedness:-
Freedom of Speech is clearly important to you. That’s nice. I am free to tell you to fuck off when you’re being an ass. So: Fuck off.
“Freedom” is the whole foundation of free software? That’s debatable. It’s clear that a peculiarly American individualist concept of “freedom” is a central conceit of many FOSSbros, certainly. There’s no consideration of social- or economic freedoms in this conceptual framework, which brings us to the slogan:
> “Freedom is merely privilege extended, unless enjoyed by one and by all”
I’d note, moreover, that any deviation from this individualist primacy leads inevitably to the “cancellation” of those who would break from the group think. (See Elasticsearch et al.) Which makes your claims to the mantle of Freedumb of Speech Protector and Dire Opponent of Cancellation all the more ridiculous. I’ve seen far more cancellations of people, individuals and groups, in the debian-legal, fsf and OSI mailing lists than I’ve ever seen down at my local RevCom Club.
All in all, I believe I can circle this one back and say:
"no consideration of social- or economic freedoms in this conceptual framework"
LMAO that's rich. I come from a country where people with your kind of ideology have banned us all from buying foreign currency to protect ourselves from crushing inflation among other things. But I'm sure some spoiled first world brat knows better about the true value of economic freedom.
Don't worry I've realized I'm wasting my time with you. Good luck, I hope you get what you want
@mattl This whole thing sucks.
Stallman is a terrible leader. It cost him the trust of "his" community. Instead of trying to earn it back, he declared himself entitled. Abuse is not leadership!
I was born a minority. I've had both violent exclusion and warm welcomes. I prefer the latter. But the culture war approach: "These sorts of beliefs ..." has not made me safer or more welcome.
I'd feel more included and supported if we separated issues of abuse and entitlement from those of beliefs.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!