
Richard Stallman Resigns from the FSF after Epstein Comments - amaccuish
https://lwn.net/Articles/799375/
======
phoe-krk
Related discussions from earlier today:

* [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20990583](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20990583)

* [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20989696](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20989696)

* [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20990251](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20990251)

------
kace91
Without entering to discuss Stallman's role as a historic figure and his
original work as a developer, I think it's about time we had a change in
leadership and public figures.

Stallman pretty much embodies the worst stereotypes about software developers,
engineers and "computer guys" in general (black-and-white attitude, lack of
social skills, bluntness, even hygiene issues). It's really baffling,
considering that his role right now is in a pretty much PR and evangelism.

I still feel bad for him, I honestly believe he is a well meaning person with
issues that aren't his fault. But the community as a whole really needs to
move past him, I think, and project a wildly different image.

------
nessunodoro
GNU software is under my finger tips more than half the hours of my waking
life. But something inside me withered so painfully when I read his comments.
The news of his resignation doesn't bring me any happiness. But it restores
some hope for me that those in leadership roles can be held accountable for
the things they say and do.

~~~
CaptainZapp
Did you actually read why professor Stallman was cruzified before writing your
comment?

There is, in my book, nothing to hold him accountable for.

~~~
rkangel
While I agree that a lot of this has got a bit blown out of proportion, there
is one line by him that I find a bit disconcerting:

> I think it is morally absurd to define rape in a way that depends on minor
> details such as what country it was in or whether the victim is 17 or 18
> years old.

[from
[https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6405929-091320191420...](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6405929-09132019142056-0001.html#document/p1)
and I hope people will agree that this isn't misleading without context]

Whatever your position on statutory rape ethically, it is nonetheless a crime
in most countries with (as many laws have) an arbitrary cut off point. Which
side of the road you drive on is an arbitrary choice, but I don't think most
of us would defend someone who got into an accident because they forgot they
were in the UK and drove on the left.

~~~
CaptainZapp
I appreciate your honest response on a sensitive subject, thanks you.

> I think it is morally absurd to define rape in a way that depends on minor
> details such as what country it was in or whether the victim is 17 or 18
> years old.

While I think it's a bit a matter of context the statement could as well be
interpreted as:

Rape is morally wrong! It doesn't matter the cultural context or the age of
the victim (alas, it's certainly a valid argument that it's especially vile
when minors are victims).

I think the "morally" is really key here and while I can understand that you
take offense with the statement I really feel it's a matter of interpretation.

You can argue that as a leader he should have been more careful how he phrases
such a statement. But it's a tall ask to engage in permanent self-censorship
when you're even a slightly exposed public person.

~~~
DagAgren
It can be interpreted as "Rape is morally wrong", but the implied conclusion
is "but this isn't rape so it's ok".

