On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 10:19:28 +0200 "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflor...@pelzflorian.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote: > > Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about? > > Perhaps > https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88 > > Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement. > > Regards, > Florian > I would like to note a lot of articles on the Internet purposely misquote Stallman. For example this header from your link: "Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely Willing’". He didn't defend Epstein, he had actually called him a "serial rapist" earlier, also in the mail he didn't say "victims", note the plural. He also said the victim could be *presented* to Minsky as entirely willing, he didn't say she actually was. Language is a really subtle tool and small things like this can make a big change. So please, be careful, when reading those articles and judge wisely, especially because the situation is a really delicate matter. I also found the link to arguments defending Stallman: https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/ I don't really know what should I think about all of this, but it would be a bit unjust if Stallman didn't have any defense, even if he made a mistake. Hope I won't get excluded from the project, because of my opinion, Jan
