The next one that needs to loose her job is that robotics engineer. On Thu, 19 Sep 2019, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 14:29:19 > From: rhkra...@gmail.com > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: I support the founder of FreeSoftware > Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:29:38 +0000 (UTC) > Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > I don't support anyone unconditionally. I don't think anyone should -- we > (all) are smarter, more discerning, and capable of dealing with things like > ambiguity. > > I read only a little bit (the begining) of the Register article covering the > interview with Richard Stallman, and from what I read there, I think he was > unfairly judged with respect to his remarks about the Giuffre incident. > > From: > https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/09/17/richard_stallman_final_interview/ > ` > Said alleged victim, Virginia Giuffre, earlier said she was told to have sex > with Minsky at Epstein's US Virgin Islands retreat. It is claimed she was 17 > at the time, in a place where the age of consent is 18. Minksy was 73. > > Stallman's post to the MIT mailing list argued, in a spectacularly insensitive > fashion, that Minsky may not have been aware Giuffre had been coerced to have > sex. > > "The most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely > willing," Stallman wrote in his post last Wednesday. "Assuming she was being > coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that > from most of his associates. I?ve concluded from various examples of > accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term 'sexual > assault' in an accusation." > ` > I also see, in the next paragraph, this: > > ` > On the internet and in news publications, this attempt to downplay the alleged > rape of a teenage trafficking-ring victim didn't go over well, and led to > further scrutiny of past emails and online posts that made matters worse. He > had previously expressed skepticism of age of consent laws and of the > wrongness of "voluntary pedophilia," suggesting there is no harm done if a > child and an adult have consensual sex together. > ' > and later: > ` > And he renounced past statements about pedophilia. > He wrote, "Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about > sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it. Through personal > conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child > can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think > adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me > to understand why." > ' > > So: > > * for what Stallman did for the FSF and such, I thank and applaud him > > * for his remarks about the Giuffre case, I feel he has been misjudged and > treated unfairly, and if I could (reasonably) do something to redress the > wrong, I would try > > * for his remarks about voluntary pedophelia, those (imho) were very wrong > and very unfortunate, and I don't respect him for having made those remarks. > It does seem, though, that he has changed his mind and repented. For changing > his mind, I also applaud and support him. > > Do I feel that he should have lost of any of his positions based on this > incident? No. > > I guess I'm saying that he (like all of us) should be judged on actual facts, > and not blindly supported (or castigated) and, at least in some cases, be > granted forgiveness for some past sins. > > Now, if he had actually had sex with a child, I don't think that could or > should be forgiven. > > If he had sex with a child, I could still thank and applaud him for his > contributions to Free Software, but punishment for a crime such as pedophilia > (which was not suggested in what I read) should be swift and sure. > > Hmm, what about Marvin Minsky -- could he really have thought that a 17 year > old (or possibly a seeming 18 year old) wanted to voluntarily have sex with > him? I suppose it is possible, but ... > > And, thinking back, I guess what Stallman was doing was, in essence defending > Minsky. Could Stallman really think that Minsky really thought the 17-year > old was voluntarily interested in having sex with him? I guess I have to > think about that one. > > My overall points though, include: > > * that we can judge some of the actions of any man one way, and other > actions by the same man another way, and sometimes one can overshadow the > other, and sometimes not. > > * I don't wish to judge a man and, for example, excuse all his sins because > of some good he has done, nor to forget the good a man may have done because > of his sins. But that doesn't mean his sins should be forgiven if they are > "factual". > > On Thursday, September 19, 2019 05:19:50 AM aprekates wrote: > > I want to express my support to Richard Stallman amidst a smear attack > > on his person, on his right to speak, but mostly to what he stands for . > > > > I stand by Richard Stallman because expressing our thougths is not a > > crime but a human right. > > > > I stand by Richard Stallman because i need an uncompromised authentic > > voice reminding me the ethic weight of our actions when we choose how to > > use, produce share software and not a voice caressing my consciousness. > > > > I stand by Richard Stallman for the freedom he brought to our digital > > world. > > > > Alexandros Prekates > > > > email: apreka...@posteo.net > > social:apreka...@diasp.eu > > chomw...@fosstodon.org > > > > > > ps: for the members of the debian community not fully aware of > > attack i'd recommend as entry readings: > > > > https://itsfoss.com/richard-stallman-controversy/ > > > > https://medium.com/@selamie/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 > > > > http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/128122 > --
