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
@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 This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini