#RichardStallman has no intention of stepping down from the #GNUProject. Good news.

"I continue to be the Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project.
I do not intend to stop any time soon."

#HatTip to #GeoffGreer for that update, which was added to the bottom of his excellent summary of what happened to Stallman and why it's so disturbing to anyone who cares about natural justice and due process:

Show thread

@strypey Yes, RMS has made an outstanding positive contribution to the world. He has also made a series of negative ones.

That article is selective in how it reports "the incident", including reductively defining the whole thing as "an incident" in the first place. Other people are characterising it as the final straw, where no-one expects that "the straw" in and of itself was significant, but that the accumulation of straws over time has become intolerable.

There don't seem to be many people who are discussing the whole issue without bias, which is to me a much more disturbing trend. Once again we have only "two sides" to a situation, with all the implied hostility that brings. There are many many more than two sides to anything.

@yojimbo @strypey if you haven't seen it, this (from, ironically, an ex-Fox News guy) is the most even handed treatment I've seen: youtube.com/watch?v=7UbQ1kc1vQ

@lightweight @strypey Not a bad video presentation, he'll be worth keeping an eye on to report well on a lot of topics.

However both he and the WaPo failed to mention the long-term dissatisfaction with RMS's non-Free behaviour. I don't think the Gnome Foundation's ED asked FSF to drop him because of this incident alone (or more specifically, not because of the inaccurate press surrounding the incident).

I agree with @strypey on what I think his position is (assuming it's "this incident is not serious enough for the outcome"), but I suspect that the outcome is probably justified when looking back at the long list of "offences".

Partly I guess the dropping by MIT was more related to them having put themselves in an untenable position over the years. But the FSF presidency seems like a reasonable change.

> I suspect that the outcome is probably justified when looking back at the long list of "offences".

This seems relevant:

"There is an underlying current of fear in my activist communities, and it is separate from the daily fear of police brutality, eviction, discrimination, and street harassment. It is the fear of appearing impure. Social death follows when being labeled a “bad” activist or simply “problematic” enough times."
- #FrancesLee

@lightweight @mike

@yojimbo and fron the same piece:
"And yet, grace and forgiveness are hard to come by in these circles. At times, I have found myself performing activism more than doing activism. I’m exhausted, and I’m not even doing the real work I am committed to do. It is a terrible thing to be afraid of my own community members, and know they’re probably just as afraid of me. Ultimately, the quest for political purity is a treacherous distraction for well-intentioned activists."

@lightweight @mike

@yojimbo also this:
"But when dictates aren’t followed, a common procedure of punishment ensues. Punishments for saying/doing/believing the wrong thing include shaming, scolding, calling out, isolating, or eviscerating someone’s social standing. Discipline and punishment has been used for all of history to control and destroy people. Why is it being used in movements meant to liberate all of us?"

It's an insightful piece, and worth reading in full.

@lightweight @mike

@strypey @yojimbo @lightweight @mike
Crazy article, I did not know that when someone founded an organisation he should not step down from it at some point... Does this mean when someone founds an organisation he is bound to be the president of it for life, I guess I have to learn about democracy.

"Notice the tactics. X has made a remark/ has behaved in a particular way – these remarks/ this behaviour might be construed as transphobic/ sexist etc. So far, OK. But it’s the next move which is the kicker. X then becomes defined as a transphobe/ sexist etc. Their whole identity becomes defined by one ill-judged remark or behavioural slip."
- the late #MarkFisher

@strypey @natacha This would be a devastating critique were it not for the fact that RMS has been doing this for 30 years.

One should not be judged a misogynist from a single ill-judged remark.

But if your response to people asking you not to ask conference attendees whether they'll date you is to have business cards saying words to the effect of “would you like me to fuck you?” in florid language and handing them out instead… maybe that's not a single ill-judged remark?

@RAOF @strypey @natacha But then he should be criticized for that, not accused of things he didn't say.

@grainloom @strypey @natacha
1) He was criticized for that over and over, and
2) I don't think he was accused of things he didn't say. Although some nuance was lost, what he said was: “The most plausible scenario is that [the 17-year-old sex-trafficing-victim] appeared entirely willing [to have sex with the 73-year old Minsky after having been flown with him on a private jet to a private island]”.

@grainloom @strypey @natacha I find the idea that Minsky just couldn't possibly find anything sufficiently unusual in this to raise his suspicions that the girl in question wasn't enthusiastically consenting to be entirely implausible.

This is a supportable (and, I think, most plausible) reading of the Medium article.

Stallman, paedophillia, ablism 

Stallman, paedophillia, ablism 

Stallman, paedophillia, ablism 

Stallman, paedophillia, ablism 


Stallman, paedophillia, ablism 

re: Stallman, paedophillia, ablism 

Sign in to participate in the conversation
R E T R O  S O C I A L

A social network for the 19A0s.