We, the anonymous editors of the Stallman report, have published our investigation of Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation today to a general audience:
https://stallman-report.org
Our report exhaustively catalogues, analyzes, and offers a rebuttal of Richard Stallman's political program of sexual violence, catalogues credible allegations of misconduct, and documents the misconduct of the #FSF circa 2019 and 2021. Please read and share our work.
Boosts encouraged.
[#]freesoftware
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from report_press@mastodon.social
@report_press@mastodon.social It's been nearly 4 years since the open letter failed to achieve anything.
Get over it, bruh.
:gnujihad:
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@report_press@mastodon.social Can I also just say that personally attacking people through an anonymous report is also a very lame thing to do?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @report_press defending a known sex pest though, that's supa-coo 🙄
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from stripey@meow.social
@stripey@meow.social @report_press@mastodon.social "known sex pest"
Having some controversial political opinions and that one Betsy story from 45 years ago are pretty far from being a sex pest.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @stripey @report_press
What controversial political opinions are you referring to?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange
@DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange @stripey@meow.social @report_press@mastodon.social The same old quotes about things that are generally considered socially unacceptable to merely disagree on with the rest of society like age of consent and pornography.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @stripey @report_press
I see, so you think that the question of whether grownups should be able to have sex with children is just something that we might respectfully "merely disagree" on?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange
@DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange @stripey@meow.social @report_press@mastodon.social No, that's not what I'm saying at all.
A lot of people (including you apparently) are literally incapable of having a civil political discussion around the laws that govern sex without immediately painting the other side of the argument as disgusting pedophiles or something. There is a huge taboo around even discussing these things!
Like for example what should be proper age of consent? Should it be 16, 17, 18, or maybe even 21? If your answer differs only slightly from the norm in your region of the world you will be called a pedophile guaranteed.
Same when it comes to the banning of pornography that includes animals for example. We should be able to have a civil discussion if the criminalization of possession of these types of pornography can be considered censorship while keeping subjective morals of doing so in the first place about this out of the discussion.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @stripey @report_press
Yes, you would be called a pedophile for saying adults should be able to have sex with children, because that's kind of the definition of the thing.
And yes, you should also be relentlessly mocked for saying that people should be allowed to have sex with animals, because WTF is wrong with you?
It's a "political opinion" only in the same sense that "we should bring back slavery" or "we should start a fascist dictatorship" is, and we've all collectively decided that these sorts of "political opinions" are garbage along with the people that hold them.
So thank you for sharing you "political opinions" and revealing yourself to the entire world as a disgusting, vile human being. Now get help or get bent.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange
@DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange @stripey@meow.social @report_press@mastodon.social Clearly you lack the emotional intelligence to remove your personal feelings from the discussion.
I never said anything about people being allowed to have sex with animals. I specifically said possessing material that involved animals, you can possess something without being the producer of the thing.
I also did not say those were my opinions. I just said people should be allowed to discuss these opinions without being seen as "disgusting, vile human beings".
Thanks again for proving the point that I'm trying to make, you absolute idiot.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press Oh fuck, a grifting debate bro. Please just go back to Twitter, this lack of basic intelligence and moral shouldn't be welcome in the Fediverse!
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from gamey@chaos.social
@gamey @SuperDicq @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press +1
https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/113308597841330944
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kkarhan@infosec.space
@SuperDicq @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press these laws are made to protect people, because it has been proved that unconsented sex relations between very young people and more mature people are actively harmful to the young people. This is extremely clear and does not need debate.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from f4grx@chaos.social
@f4grx german/most euro laws are probably pretty close to what stallman has argued for. which doesn't serve the outrage, of course.
@SuperDicq @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bonifartius@qoto.org
@f4grx @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press
It's also done to combat sexual exploitation of vulnerable people aka. minors.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kkarhan@infosec.space
@SuperDicq @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press you'd have much better luck with a "civil political discussion" about the general age of consent if you weren't talking about it in the context of RMS defending people who are unambiguously adults engaging with people who are under 18. You must think we're stupid, trying to pretend that you're making a abstract, general point when the other side of your mouth is protesting he doesn't deserve the backlash for very specific opinions
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from orman@furry.engineer
@suqdiq @orman @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press you too should please seek some professional help as well...
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kkarhan@infosec.space
@suqdiq @orman @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press
Well, I'm not a U.S. citizen and child marriages are not just illegal in my juristiction but also retroactively null and void per law.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kkarhan@infosec.space
@suqdiq @orman @stripey @DaveMWilburn @report_press You clearly and purposefully misinterpret stuff to project things.
Also it's not that simple, but I have neither the spoons nor am I in mood to argue with someone on the internet who's clearly arguing in bad faith and should get their facts from a licensed lawyer at their sole expense instead...
Again, make.of that what you will: RMS is a pedo simpathizer and I think that minors should't be allowed to get married - period!
[#]EOD #thxbye #next
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kkarhan@infosec.space
@SuperDicq @report_press OK, so since I have lots of pending work with very tight deadlines but zero (0) concentration skills, I’m gonna dig my own grave for no benefit whatsoever :blobcatsip:
I strongly agree that age of consent as a hard line is nonsense. There’s no universal, discrete time period where sexual and mental maturity are reached. It’s so nonsense that in countries like mine, you’ll find that courts basically ignore it even in cases of a significant age gap as factors like “mental age” are instead considered. There’s even cases of minors sexually abusing adults, the elderly, etc. imho the important thing is power imbalances and vulnerability, and those can only be properly considered case-by-case. And I see why legal age can hinder development of teenagers as Stallman says, as if they were all innocent, pure beings of light until reaching 18 (or even 25 as some are saying by now????), with no right to e.g. any pornography or sexting, regardless of how healthy it may be.
However. Stallman makes the point that all teenagers should be treated as sexual equivalents to adults, being able to offer consent accordingly. I am also strongly against this idea. Shouldn’t be hard to see why: 12 year olds are in average less mature than, say, 40 year olds. In fact, at 12 one barely even starts knowing they have impulses and desires, and most likely don’t even know much about their bodies, let alone social dynamics, law, giving birth, etc. Learning the hard way is probably not the best course of action. The report makes a decent job of giving examples.
Also, (producing) CSAM bad. Shouldn’t be really worth arguing about.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from xerz@fedi.xerz.one
@xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social I just want to make very clear I do not agree with Stallman on these topics, but I do not think he should be called a pedophile for simply voicing his opinion.
And yes producing CSAM is bad. The A stands for abuse, abuse is always bad, there's no arguments here.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @report_press He's not being called anything for "simply voicing his opinion". Most of us go through a phase where we question such things. (I basically came to the same conclusion as @xerz, with a little more pessimism about the ability of law to represent such nuanced concepts as "power relations", aged 15-ish.)
I think the fact he still holds these views, even after dozens of people have explained to him how he's wrong and harming others, is worthy of criticism.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org @report_press@mastodon.social @xerz@fedi.xerz.one Sure, I can agree with the criticism, that's fair.
But I don't see how this is something worthy of ruining someone's career, credibility and boycotting every organization he's associated with?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press It's not. It's obviously not. But that's not what's happening.
Richard Stallman refuses to improve as a person, except in exceptional, increasingly-rare circumstances, and people in positions of power are closing ranks around him.
If he was just an arsehole nobody who contributed some ideas, that's one thing. If he was an influential arsehole who worked on himself (e.g. Linus Torvalds), that's another thing. But he's made himself a political figure.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press At any point, he has the option of no longer being a political figure. He doesn't have to resign from free software, or even activism, so long as he isn't wielding the power of organisations and bureaucracy and other people's labour for his own ends.
I've stated above some parts of my views about certain political issues unrelated to the issue of free software—about which of those activities are or aren't unjust. Your views about them might differ,
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press
and that's precisely the point.
— https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freedom-to-run.html, Richard Stallman (2012)
“The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a nonprofit with a worldwide mission to promote computer user freedom. We defend the rights of all software users.”
When protecting Richard Stallman's desire to have influence is at odds with the FSF's mission, freedom 0 takes precedence.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press On a personal note: I don't think Richard Stallman should be in charge of the FSF, but I also plan to request his feedback on something. (And yes, of course, I would credit him if he were to contribute to it.)
I don't think we should exclude Richard Stallman. But, acknowledging that he is often unpleasant to be around and interact with, we should not require anybody to do so.
Keeping him on in his position in the FSF amounts to that requirement.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org @xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social Sure, that's probably one of the first reasonable takes I've heard from someone who opposes Stallman being in charge of the FSF.
I don't agree, but I can see why you would think that.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org @xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social I'm pretty sure all his work that he does for the FSF is to promote free software. I don't think there's anyone as dedicated to the cause as Stallman is personally.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq He has been known to veto decisions made in GNU projects he doesn't even maintain.
The fact he believes he has a veto, and the fact that other people act as though he has a veto – the fact he has a voting seat – suggests that's not the extent of what he does.
I'm sure Richard Stallman feels righteous, but a feeling of righteousness is easy. It appears he's not willing to put in the hard work of self-improvement. Even Linus Torvalds (opponent of GPLv3) has him beat there.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org Also I don't agree with Torvald's opposition towards the GPLv3 whatsoever.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq Even the AGPLv3 doesn't go far enough: they've invented new and exciting forms of tivoization that technically don't break the rules. We need a GPLv4 imo.
(And, despite saying that, I've mostly stopped licensing stuff as -or-later. I no longer trust the FSF to write a decent GPLv4. Heck, I barely trust Creative Commons any more.)
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org I agree, I wouldn't mind a GPLv4 (or 3.1?) that addresses some issues, especially clarification on code usage in machine learning training data and other modern issues.
But I'm not a lawyer so I'm not sure if that is necessary.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @wizzwizz4 The thing is that technically if the training data (content like video, photos, text) who are under the default proprietary license instead of one of the copyleft creative commons, then by the usual logic then the result should be also proprietary.
I'm taking of course a worse case scenario (as it should be with current corpos/legislation).
But it would be great if legally a General Public Licensed software would have exceptions to this like would a research project would have.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world
@wizzwizz4 @SuperDicq
I no longer trust the FSF to write a decent GPLv4. Heck, I barely trust Creative Commons any more.)
Fear is the mind killer if you want to solve this study and share NVC.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world
@mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world @wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org If you put -or-later on your software you need to have a lot of trust in FSF that they will not get compromised at any future date. I personally still use or-later because I have faith but I do think that not using -or-later is a completely valid standpoint.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social What I want to mention is that if properly argumented I think both "The age of consent should be lowered to 14" and "Nobody should be allowed to have sex until marriage" are can be valid opinions.
If you think one of these opinions is valid and the other one is not, you are clearly biased.
The point of public discourse is to find a middle ground between all these far reaching fringe opinions. But that will never happen if we start considering discussion about certain topics taboo.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press The report addresses your "middle ground" in the rebuttal section. Just in case you'd actually care to read what you're attacking on principle.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tstriker@mas.to
@tstriker@mas.to @xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social I've read the whole thing and I don't see it. All I see about this topic "stallman's views are more radical than ours and that's why we consider it misconduct so he must step down".
Please point me to the exact section where the report says "other people's viewpoints are not bad actually" (it doesn't).
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press https://stallman-report.org/#normalization-of-sexual-relations-between-adults-and-minors
From "We now offer a rebuttal of Stallman’s political position" where it shows clearly—and with data—how there is simply no middle ground to be had on topics like sexual relations between adults and minors.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tstriker@mas.to
@tstriker@mas.to @xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social That's exactly what I'm saying.
The report states its opinion as fact, it considers Stallman's opinions are simply invalid.
Just because you have data and sources that does not mean that your opinion becomes a fact. It definitely helps improve the validity of your arguments, but it is still just opinion.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@tstriker@mas.to @xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social Personally I still think Stallman is allowed to have his own personal beliefs and opinions, even if some of them are objectionable to some people.
He has not done any actual misconduct like break any laws or committed actual crimes.
I still do not see why he and four other people must be removed from the FSF board.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press @tstriker having wrong opinions IS misconduct
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fial@ihatebeinga.live
@fial@ihatebeinga.live @xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social @tstriker@mas.to If you think having a wrong opinion is misconduct you're punishing people for thoughtcrimes.
There are no wrong opinions and everyone is allowed to have their own personal beliefs as long as you don't harm others.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@fial@ihatebeinga.live @xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social @tstriker@mas.to Just to be clear it is also not wrong to point out flaws in Stallman's opinions.
But it is wrong to boycott the FSF just because some guy has opinions.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press > Sexual relationships between adults and minors are prohibited by social and legal norms because a differential of life and sexual experiences between adults and minors enables adults to manipulate minors for the purpose of sexual gratification.
this is not simply difference of opinion
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tstriker@mas.to
@SuperDicq @xerz @report_press Further, consider the inverse - an opinion that flies in the face of facts.
Such an opinion is invalid. Demanding a compromise between something that's completely whack and something that is backed up by logic and data is a logical fallacy.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from tstriker@mas.to
@tstriker@mas.to @xerz@fedi.xerz.one @report_press@mastodon.social The notion that the exact age of 18 years should be correct age is simply an opinion however. In reality this age differs from person to person.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange @stripey@meow.social @report_press@mastodon.social
I mean it was worse than that. rms literally said "voluntary" pedophilia is fine, it wasn't even about aoc. Afaik he retracted that statement but still very weird to say something like that in the first place. Pretty sure he never did anything of that nature to anyone tho.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from dushman@hollow.raccoon.quest
@dushman@hollow.raccoon.quest @DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange @stripey@meow.social @report_press@mastodon.social Yes, he retracted that statement a long time ago at this point, so I don't think it is a valid reason to remove him from the FSF.
I am indeed also very certain that he has not and does not want to abuse children.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange @stripey@meow.social @report_press@mastodon.social
Boils down to him saying weird shit on those subjects over the years. Wouldn't say he's a horrible person though. I'm not even a big fan of GNU/FSF.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from dushman@hollow.raccoon.quest
@dushman @SuperDicq @DaveMWilburn @report_press
I'm not even a big fan of GNU/FSF.
You wouldn't even be there if it weren't for those projects. Even the internet as a whole wouldn't be there. We'd probably be stuck in AOLs sandbox ecosystem.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world
@mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @DaveMWilburn@infosec.exchange @report_press@mastodon.social
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from dushman@hollow.raccoon.quest
@dushman @SuperDicq @DaveMWilburn @report_press
that's giving them too much credit.
The GPL influenced so many things, you can historically look at all public stuff we have today and most of them always have "I was inspired by the GPL/RMS"
Wikipedia, redit (the old), the www, EFF etc... all of that started because of that single domino effect.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini