Matthew Garrett <mj...@srcf.ucam.org> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 09:15:20PM -0500, quil...@riseup.net wrote:
>> Matthew Garrett <mj...@srcf.ucam.org> writes:
>> 
>> > On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 03:02:38PM -0500, quil...@riseup.net wrote:
>> >> Matthew Garrett <mj...@srcf.ucam.org> writes:
>> >> > Where did I perform this conflation?
>> >> 
>> >> Sun, 4 Apr 2021 02:13:54 +0100 on this mailing list.
>> >
>> > I was referring to Jake (hence "a rapist", meaning I was only talking 
>> > about one of the people mentioned there). Sorry if I wasn't clear - I 
>> > disagree with RMS on multiple topics, but I don't believe him to be a 
>> > rapist or for his acts to be anywhere near as bad as Jake's.
>> 
>> I do not see either as bad.  I am no one to judge them because I have no
>> direct experience with any major problem with them.  I can only retrieve
>> testimonies which I cannot evaluate the truth or circumstances which
>> have surrounded the alleged hurt caused.  I only can see the direct
>> benefit obtained by me from both of them: the free software movement and
>> anonymity, respectively.
>
> I can - Jake raped or sexually assaulted several people I know. No 
> social benefit can be used to justify that.

I can't because I have no evidence.  The evidence you present is not
convincing to me.  More convincing are the actions of the employers you
have had and the policies of partners of your curent employer. Their
actions are clearly anti-encryption, antifreedom and monopolistic.  The
testimonies against Jake have not been tested for verification.  Some
people say they are true, others say they are false.  But GAFAMs actions
are clearly antisocial.  Even if rape may be worse than global control
of entire populations, both are immoral.  But proof is much better than
gossip.  I am not saying that rape alegations are false.  I say they
have no proof beyond doubt, unlike GAFAMs.
_______________________________________________
Discussion mailing list
Discussion@lists.fsfellowship.eu
https://lists.fsfellowship.eu/mailman/listinfo/discussion

Reply via email to