Richard Stallman resigns from the FSF

Posted Sep 17, 2019 15:39 UTC (Tue) by jzb (editor, #7867)
In reply to: Richard Stallman resigns from the FSF by evad
Parent article: Richard Stallman resigns from the FSF

Stallman isn't being sent to jail. He's been pressured out of positions that put his opinions in the spotlight moreso than your average person. It's entirely appropriate for a community to call for the removal of a figurehead who doesn't speak for the broader community, particularly when that figurehead insists on being spectacularly offensive to norms of that community, whether or not they are directly relevant to their title.

If Stallman had said "you know, I've decided proprietary software is OK sometimes" a lot of the people defending him for his current statements would be calling for his dismissal. It's ridiculous for people to defend him for saying things far, far, far worse that actually pose real harm to people who should instead be protected by society.

Richard Stallman resigns from the FSF

Posted Sep 17, 2019 20:05 UTC (Tue) by mfuzzey (subscriber, #57966) [Link]

>If Stallman had said "you know, I've decided proprietary software is OK sometimes" a lot of the people defending him for his current statements would be calling for his dismissal

Yes but that would be in direct contradiction with the aims of the FSF.

Obviously if someone's opinions in the field of action of some organisation go against the aims of said organisation there is a problem.

But I don't think that most people should be forced to leave an organisation for any opinions they may hold that have nothing to do with the domain of activity of that organisation.

It's a bit different for politicians because they, by definition, handle everything.

If there is *legal* case to be made then he should be prosecuted, otherwise left alone.

That's not to say I agree with his previous opinions on pedophilia. I certainly don't, but I don't think it has anything to do with FSF.

Removing people for unpopular opinions that have nothing to do with their function sets a very dangerous precedent .

Richard Stallman resigns from the FSF

Posted Sep 18, 2019 16:55 UTC (Wed) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (1 responses)

> It's ridiculous for people to defend him for saying things far, far, far worse that actually pose real harm to people who should instead be protected by society.

Are they harmed by the fact that they CONSENTED.

Or are they harmed by the fact that society said they should not be allowed to consent.

Or are they harmed by the fact that they realised, POST FACTO, that society disapproved of their actions.

Personally, I think the third one is far more harmful than the first. BUT I DON'T KNOW. And more importantly, you don't know either! As is so common, you are taking speculation as fact, probably confusing cause with effect, and as the saying goes, "for every complex problem, there is a solution which is both simple and WRONG".

As I said elsewhere, where do you draw the line? The only SAFE place is to outlaw sex completely ... :-)

Cheers,
Wol

Richard Stallman resigns from the FSF

Posted Sep 19, 2019 7:28 UTC (Thu) by gfernandes (subscriber, #119910) [Link]

The answer to: "Where do you draw the line?", is refreshingly simple: it's wherever the society you live in draws the line. No?

If you don't agree with the line, you are free to raise logical objections.

However, if you raise unfounded, or unsupportable objections, you should not be surprised at general backlash, particularly if you happen to be a public figure.

Stallman publicly expressed opinions of dubious psychological value, on deeply sensitive social issues. Stallman was President of the FSF.

Hardly surprising then, that there was this backlash.