Selamjie

> I think it's also worth asking why he didn't have more an impact Yes... https://opensourcetogo.blogspot.com/2009/07/good-gcds-beginning-with-s… I https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 Wonder https://www.wired.com/story/richard-stallman-and-the-fall-of-the-cluel… Why https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/09/richard-stallman-leaves-mi…

> this anonymous blog post https://selamjie.medium.com The author's name is right there in the URL.

Stallman seems to have a history of being manipulative and sexually harassing women. https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7… He also has some troubling views that at best make him an inappropriate spokesperson. https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix

I don’t think Stallman is irrelevant. He’s still in charge of the GNU stuff, he still blocks progress on GCC, he still has donors and an audience, he’s still a pedophilia apologist. Edit: https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scientist-richar… https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794

No, the EFF is allowed to criticize RMS as much as they want. Criticizing RMS doesn't make them hypocritical. However, linking [1] and spreading slanderous lies (I'm talking about Selam G.'s hitpieces [2] from 2019) isn't very fitting for an organization that claims to defend Internet free speech. RMS never defended Epstein -- not even once. His only crime was being a pedantic aspie. If the EFF considers that to be good enough reason to cancel him, then yes, I think that EFF are total hypocrites. FWIW, EFF's official blog post only linked Selam G.'s hitpiece that has been thoroughly debunked elsewhere [3]. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/03/statement-re-election-richard-st… [2] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7… [3] https://stallmansupport.org

I would encourage you to read why Stallman resigned from MIT [1]. The emails that were “leaked” were not private discussions. They were sent to email lists that included everyone in CSAIL and to be frank, were awful. Here is a link to the emails [2]. [1] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 [2] https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scientist-richar…

Here is the original hit piece leading to RMS' cancellation, which includes a full copy of the "offending" email: https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 The media then twisted that into "Famed Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Described Epstein Victims As 'Entirely Willing'" [0], which is not something that RMS claimed in that email. To this day there has been no redactin, apology or anything else to atone for this deliberate character assasination - but sure, keep blaming the victim. [0] https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scientist-richar…

Other than this anonymous blog post https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 and some comments he made on a mailing list that were completely twisted, what exactly did he do wrong?

This is not what happened. The mass attack on Stallman happened after Selam Jie Gano wrote her hate piece[0] full of half-truths and manipulations that later were quoted by the media as "Stallman is defending Epstein" whereas the opposite was true. When I compared what RMS actually wrote with what the press reported, I was appalled - it's as if people collectively lost their ability to read. [0] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794

Mostly in-person around MIT (just like Captain Crunch or Jake Appelbaum in the conference scene... informal until it wasn't), but a few have made it onto the web. See #2 here: https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7…

From emails posted here: https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 > The announcement of the Friday event does an injustice to Marvin Minsky: > “deceased AI ‘pioneer’ Marvin Minsky (who is accused of assaulting one of Epstein’s victims [2])” [ ... ] > We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing.

>Do you have sources for the "well documented" views that pedophilia is not harmful and that children can give consent and should be allowed to engage in sexual intercourse? Because the blurb above certainly does not say any of that. Apart from the appendix linked to in the open letter being critiqued in the OP, there is this often mentioned quote by the man himself: “I am sceptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren’t voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.” [0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21287006 [1]https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix... [2]https://medium.com/@thomas.bushnell/a-reflection-on-the-depa... [3]http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html

https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7… >I recall being told early in my freshman year “If RMS hits on you, just say ‘I’m a vi user’ even if it’s not true.” >Richard Stallman told me of his misery and that he’d kill himself if I didn’t go out with him. There are plenty of primary sources, and they're not "corporate lobbyists". RMS is toxic.

Yes, it is good form to link to the claims you are debunking, but these claims are not strawmen. If you want an example of people making untrue claims about "Email #2", here's one very popular Medium post doing just that: > ... and then says that an enslaved child could, somehow, be "entirely willing". https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 The dead comment next to mine has more examples. That said, the line > I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. is incredibly disgusting, no matter how you look at it.

He also said: “I think it is morally absurd to define “rape” in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17.” Source: https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 He is defending a 73 year old who had sex with a 17 year old. He doesn't know the 17 yo in the situation, is calling her a part of a harem and saying that it's not "really rape" even though legally it is. All this in a mailing list containing undergrad students who are of that age.

I would say this is a pretty good run-down - https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7… .

> I do find it terrifying though how he is lynched for what is essentially rational and permissible speech in an ugly wrapper. What he said in 2019 was basically the last straw for many people of behaviour that stretches back a decade or three: * https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7… He hasn't admitted to doing anything wrong, or feeling regret for any words/actions, and so the thinking is if he won't ask for forgiveness (?) then why should he be let back in?

It’s not just the opinions he’s held (some of which are incredibly disgusting) but it’s also the things he’s done at MIT. I encourage you to read the stories [1] of those who have interacted with him. This isn’t “cancel culture gone mad”, this is a terrible person being held accountable for their actions. [1] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7…

I can link you some examples, but a complete list is impossible. In the middle of this article: https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7…

Start here: https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7…

> His only crime was being a pedantic aspie. If you actually read the article by Selam G., you'll immediately see that this is false. "When I was a teen freshman, I went to a buffet lunch at an Indian restaurant in Central Square with a graduate student friend and others from the AI lab. I don’t know if he and I were the last two left, but at a table with only the two of us, Richard Stallman told me of his misery and that he’d kill himself if I didn’t go out with him." This is clearly a case of sexual coercion. If, due to autism, RMS was totally unable to avoid sexually harassing women he had power over, then clearly he should never have had a position of power in FSF or anywhere else. "Many, many years ago, women in the AI and CS labs met to deal with the problematic atmosphere for women in the labs. We met as a group, discussed the issues, complied examples, presented them to the labs, then wrote a report. In the early 80’s, it was a pretty big deal but it would seem it did not have lasting effects." RMS clearly harmed many women over many years. It's telling that people like you never acknowledge the accounts of women who have specific, individual complaints against him. Even the Stallman Support page you link to has a bunch of pedantic corrections over whether RMS "really" defended Epstein, in addition to generic articles about cancel culture that say nothing about RMS harassing women grad students at MIT. EFF was correct in criticizing RMS. He shouldn't have been…

I found this satire article insightful: https://medium.com/@ultralux97/stallman-must-be-removed-a3061b09fb22 He posts hundreds of posts on his personal blog condemning rape, and they cherry-pick the one post where he argued for a different definition of rape.[0] He is accused of being transphobic despite asking everyone to "honor their preferences about their gender identity" with respect to pronouns.[1] The letter accused Stallman of sexual harassment. The appendix explains that for thirty years, had an unacceptable way of asking women out on dates. Note that he has never been accused of groping or sexual assault.[2] The original open letter's Appendix[2] has two true claims (and one false claim I won't address here): - In 1999, he had a mattress in his office which he slept on. This made some women avoid RMS because they considered it abnormal and creepy. - In 1985, he told a woman he'd kill himself if he didn't date her. EDIT: The accusation of sexual harassment may have validity as he was known to hand out pleasure cards. [0]: Ctrl-F this for "rape": https://web.archive.org/web/20210325013942/https://stallman.org/archiv… [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26584613 [2]: https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7…

https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7… Among other examples: “When I was a teen freshman, I went to a buffet lunch at an Indian restaurant in Central Square with a graduate student friend and others from the AI lab. I don’t know if he and I were the last two left, but at a table with only the two of us, Richard Stallman told me of his misery and that he’d kill himself if I didn’t go out with him. I felt bad for him and also uncomfortable and manipulated. I did not like being put in that position — suddenly responsible for an “important” man. What had I done to get into this situation? I decided I could not be responsible for his living or dying, and would have to accept him killing himself. I declined further contact. He was not a man of his word or he’d be long dead.” —Betsy S., Bachelor’s in Management Science, ’85 His social cluelessness is legendary--no one really disputes it. Why it wouldn't be true toward women as well, I have no idea. I'm sure you will find a way to dismiss this, but there are plenty of stories out there if you look.

I am on a quest for facts, hard in this debate. So this was the original post that lead to RMS resign. https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 Here is a defending one. https://whoisylvia.medium.com/richard-stallman-has-been-vilified-by-th… But there I have a question. Regarding the "Knight for justice (and hot ladies)" sign. "not the sign about welcoming “hot ladies” on his MIT Media lab office door, which someone else wrote as a joke and which he removed but not before someone took a photo of it" Was the sign a one-time joke, someone knowingly did, RMS left amused there for a while, days, weeks, months? Or was he annoyed and removed it once he got to it? Or was it part of a smear campaign? Even just happened recently at the time of the attacks, or way before? Quite different scenarios. I suspect the first one to be true. But I am open to more solid facts, for example by someone, who actually was or is at the MIT.

I recall I left Mozilla before the same-sex marriage fight, but I'm familiar with it. Just as I wouldn't call Brendan or gerv a psycho-sadist, I also wouldn't call the people who called for their resignations names, nor group them all together. I think name-calling, especially of a large group which shares only one thing in common is antithetical to building inclusive human communities. Literally we're excluding people and calling them Stasi members because we disagree with them. If you want people to be kind to each other, and if you're against cancelling people for their opinions, it's got to start somewhere. I also want to speak to your two other examples, Linus and RMS. WRT Linus, I personally know many talented people who wouldn't touch Linux development specifically because of him. It's cool that Linus has made your life better. He's also made a lot of people's lives worse. Where's their due process? WRT RMS, I take issue with the idea that he was not given due process. In fact he was allowed to stay for years, despite harassing women and acting inappropriately in his position. The Epstein email was a last straw. But also: What makes you think he wasn't given due process? He says he was "pressured" by MIT and resigned. Do you think he couldn't have fought it? It sounds like he decided not to fight it. That's different than not being given due process. Again with RMS, it's clear that his behavior was deeply upsetting to a lot of people. …

Right but what are we actually doing to cancel Bill Gates? The information that Bill Gates had meetings with Epstein came to light 2 years ago but we still had articles promoting the Gates foundation and Gates work with vaccines. Bill Gates worked with MIT on quantum dot tech: https://news.mit.edu/2019/storing-vaccine-history-skin-1218 Bill Gates donated money to MIT's Media Lab: https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-connections-jeffrey-epstein… Will MIT be returning that money as well? >But you'll find that the biggest critics of Stallman were also the biggest critics of Gates. >I was shocked. I continued talking to my friend, a female graduate student in CSAIL, about everything, trying to get the full email thread (I wasn’t on the mailing list). I even started emailing reporters — local and national, news sites, newspapers, radio stations. I couldn’t stop thinking about it. https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Selam+G+Stallman&t=ffab&ia=web >https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 >https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e7… and yet: >https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Selam+G+Bill+Gates&t=ffab&ia=web Nothing.