October 14th, 2024 Richard Stallman (aka “RMS”) is the founder of GNU and the Free Software Foundation and present-day voting member of the Free Software Foundation (FSF) board of directors and “Chief GNUisance” of the GNU project. He is responsible for innumerable contributions to the free software movement, setting its guiding principles, organizing political action, and directly contributing to a flourishing free software ecosystem. The majority of Stallman’s political activity has been of priceless value to society at large.
  • HighlyRegardedArtist@lemmy.world
    13·
    2 months ago

    You might want to remember that he has done more to advance open source software than perhaps any other person on this planet. You don’t get to take away someone’s achievements just because you don’t like them…

    • Orygin@sh.itjust.works
      8·
      2 months ago

      I don’t see anyone trying to take away his achievement. The report and most commenters even recognize his contribution.
      Also this goes more deeply than “not liking them”, he has some morally reprehensible views. I admit I haven’t read the whole report, but I have seen some of the things it touches on in the past and it’s pretty damning.

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      4·
      2 months ago

      I gave him credit for that while also saying we shouldn’t platform him or give him attention until and unless he recants and / or apologizes. Just like the report says.

      • rah@feddit.ukEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        recants and / or apologizes

        Just curious what, precisely, you would expect him to recant or apologise for?

          • rah@feddit.ukEnglish
            0·
            2 months ago

            From what? I’m not sure what in the report you think needs apologising for. Did you actually read the report? Is there a sentence you can quote and say “he needs to apologise for this”?

            • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
              1·
              2 months ago

              I believe you’re arguing in bad faith because the report makes it obvious what objectionable statements were made. Bye!

              • rah@feddit.ukEnglish
                1·
                2 months ago

                the report makes it obvious what objectionable statements were made

                I disagree. The report claims there are disagreeable statements but when you actually look at the quotes of what Stallman said, they don’t match the claims or conclusions of the report.

                This is why I’m asking if you can actually quote something Stallman said.

                I believe you’re arguing in bad faith

                I don’t think you’ve actually read the report.

                • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
                  1·
                  2 months ago

                  I skimmed the first handful of alleged harmful statements on two topics before deciding I wouldn’t benefit from reading the whole thing.

    • lad@programming.devEnglish
      21·
      2 months ago

      I think, this is what contemporary cancel culture usually tries to do.

      I also think, that this is wrong on most occasions. Maybe sometimes possible damage warrants cancelling someone, I don’t know