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 @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
@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 @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
@SuperDicq @mangeurdenuage And, like, I'm going to be around and contactable for the next few decades at least. If GPLv4 comes out, and someone tells me about it, I can review it and decide whether to relicense my software.
If I get hit by a bus, whoever inherits the copyright can deal with that. If they don't want to bother, well, I do trust the Software Freedom Conservancy.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@wizzwizz4 @SuperDicq
I do trust the Software Freedom Conservancy.
I don't. They went full retard with the slander that happened a few years ago and that's not ok.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world
@mangeurdenuage @SuperDicq Given how you phrased that, I expect I'll disagree with your assessment. But, I haven't heard about this. What happened?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@wizzwizz4 @SuperDicq Basically a group of schizos accused rms of a lot of stuff when he argued in a mailing list about the relation of Marvin Minsky and Epstein, then drama happened see https://stallmansupport.org/
As I said in another post, this is a fucking waste of time and the same people are still trying to gank rms on those fantasies of them.
There's like so much work to do legally and technically for computer freedom and these people waist there time degrading the whole communities over nothing.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world
@mangeurdenuage @SuperDicq I'm familiar with that. I somewhat agree, but I believe you've misrepresented the situation, and I'm not sure why you're holding the Software Freedom Conservancy culpable.
The later (and earlier) criticisms of Richard Stallman are valid. Indeed, criticisms about his opinions on that very topic are also valid! Taking one quote out of context "as evidence" of reprehensible views, is not however acceptable.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
@wizzwizz4 @mangeurdenuage @SuperDicq I must have missed the part where RMS did actual harm to someone.
Having an opinion, disagreeable or not, does no harm.
Stop normalizing the idea of thought-crimes, thx.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from funbaker@chaos.social
@funbaker@chaos.social @wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org @mangeurdenuage@shitposter.world I agree.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq I tried to read the "report". The part I read is already full of shit.
The source for one of the "allegations" is the apology for that one, followed by the accusations that this apology does not cover all the other "allegations".
This can only be described as being full of shit. No matter how hard I try.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from funbaker@chaos.social
@funbaker@chaos.social Oh yeah especially the section "Analysis of Stallman’s published comments" that contains a supposed table where they count Stallman's statements and his retractions.
It is obviously unfair to count the amount of retractions against the amount of statements relating to a certain topic.
Expecting a retraction for every single individual statement that you consider problematic is unreasonable. I bet Stallman himself doesn't remember the exact thing he said 20+ years ago on some random mailing list.
If someone makes a retraction on a single topic you should assume that all the other related statements to the same topic are to be considered retracted as well.
I might go as far and say that the way they present this table is done so maliciously.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@funbaker@chaos.social Also the explicit call to action at the end of the report for all the listed FSF members that the report considers "contemporaneous with the associated patterns of misconduct" to step down leaves a specifically bad taste in my mouth.
This is textbook cancel culture. Fostering a toxic "you're with us or against us" narrative.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
@SuperDicq "Cancel culture" is a quite modern term. No, this is a classic withhunt, minus the burning at the stake.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from funbaker@chaos.social
@funbaker@chaos.social Cancel culture is the social media equivalent in the modern era. I think it applies here.
There is a reason why cancel culture is listed under discrimination on Wikipedia, because it's generally bad. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini