> He missed the point that regardless of those details she was sexual assaulted. Further, he seems oblivious to the fact that splitting hairs defending his friend distracts from the real issue: that this isn't about any of them, it's about what happened to the victims. I think that take is fair enough but I agree making that case is bone headed. Not because he shouldn't speak his mind, but that it's just besides the point.

I don't know... to me it seems totally understandable (even somewhat admirable) that Stallman would stand up for a deceased friend/colleague and try to set the record straight.

I think most people would stand up for a friend in this way. I think where Stallman erred is by making it all about Minsky without in anyway acknowledging what had happened to these girls. It came off poorly.

His friend is accused of having sex with an underage prostitute on a billionares private island.

The fact that he thinks people don't have issues with that, but with the fact that he may have forced himself on her, is what makes him a piece of shit.

I think that details matter when assessing the severity of a crime. The law also takes details into account, assigning different categories and punishments depending on the details of the sexual offense. So yes I think the details of whether he forced himself on her matter. So do other details like what type of sexual acts occurred, the victims age at the time, whether he knew she was under age, etc.

To be clear, I think Epstein committed some terrible crimes and I am glad he was eventually brought to justice. And based on the limited details available surrounding Minsky’s involvement, it certainly looks bad for him as well. And my heart goes out to the victims for the terrible exploitation they were subjected to... I literally can’t even imagine what that must have been like as I have never experienced anything even remotely comparable in my life.

But that doesn’t change the fact that I think some acts of sexual misconduct are worse than others. That I think details and precision matter when accusing someone of a crime. Or that I think the accused should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Does that make me a “piece of shit” too?

> I think that details matter when assessing the severity of a crime.

Sure, but no permutation of details could make an actual sexual encounter, which is the hypothetical RMS is talking about (what really happened isn't even relevant when assessing what RMS said), benign or okay. It could be even worse, sure, but not really good.

> whether he knew she was under age

The only way to not know that would be to not care.

Who is saying that anything is “benign or ok”?

Saying that one crime is less severe than another does not imply that the lesser crime is “benign”.

Stallman takes issue with the word “assault” because he doesn’t think it likely that Minsky forcibly assaulted the victim. That doesn’t mean he is saying Minsky is without guilt, or that the whole Epstein ordeal is somehow “benign or ok”.

Quoting WP:

> The United States Department of Justice defines sexual assault as "any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient.

Saying Minsky might not have realized she was coerced, in context of a 17 year old on a private island having sex with a 73 year old, is just nonsense. If (!) he did anything at all (and so far, there's only a claim that Minsky turned her down, plus no claim he had sex with her, AFAIK), that'd be sexual assault just by merit of the power differential.

If RMS doesn't understand that at age 66, that's tough luck, and splitting hairs about the arbitraryness of the age of consent or territorial jurisdictions, then talking about how it was all misunderstood and mischaracterized, because he was also, additionally falsely accused of defending Epstein, doesn't make it seem like he learned anything, at all.

Last, but not least: Not knowing someone's age because one didn't ask for ID isn't ignorance, it's not wanting to know. Likewise, a highly intelligent man thinking "oh my, this young lady who also happens to vacation here is really into me, what a lucky bastard I am" and any variation thereof doesn't pass the smell test. Even having attempted that argument was insulting to anyone's intelligence, and it's insulting to victims of such things.

> Likewise, a highly intelligent man thinking "oh my, this young lady who also happens to vacation here is really into me, what a lucky bastard I am" and any variation thereof doesn't pass the smell test.

I didn’t interpret Stallman’s comment to mean this at all. But rather that Minsky assumed that the victim was engaging in prostitution and willfully engaging in sexual acts in exchange for money.

With regards to not knowing someone’s age, there are a few plausible scenarios that come to mind. The victim could have lied to Minsky. Epstein could have lied to Minsky. She could have presented a fake ID, etc.

I think you making a lot of assumptions here that just aren’t borne out by the evidence available. Assumptions about what Stallman thinks or has implied, and assumptions about the nature of the accusations against Minsky. As far as I am aware we don’t know where or when it allegedly happened, the victim’s age at the time, or the details of how it was initiated. Some of the details you are assuming about the victim being 17 or the encounter having occurred on a private island seem to have been pieced together in a highly speculative verge article or from internet commentators (if you have quality sources of information that report otherwise please share). Stallman may not have had these details in mind or may have had a different set of assumptions when he wrote what he did.

I for one would like to see Stallman elaborate on some of his positions to better answer these questions. Not silenced.

> I didn’t interpret Stallman’s comment to mean this at all.

It does though, just by leaving room for Minsky just thinking she might be "willing", "not coerced".

> As far as I am aware we don’t know where or when it allegedly happened

On that private island during an AI conference held by Epstein when Minsky was 73 and the girl 17.

Though AFAIK there isn't a claim Minsky did anything, just that the girl was "directed to have sex" with VIP, including Minsky. One person stated Minsky turned her down, and she AFAIK didn't claim Minsky even touched her.

But that "something happened" is the hypothetical scenario within which Stallman argued on that mailing list. It's not my "assumption" at all.

> Some of the details you are assuming about the victim being 17 or the encounter having occurred on a private island seem to have been pieced together in a highly speculative verge article or from internet commentators (if you have quality sources of information that report otherwise please share)

Why not just ask right away, instead of after me telling me about my assumptions and sources. The first thing I heard about this was a link to the mailing list, the rest from searches. I never even read the Verge article, no need. I know some articles falsely claim RMS defended Epstein, but that's also not from reading them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Minsky#Allegation_of_ch...

> In 2016, Virginia Giuffre named Minsky as one of the people she was "directed to have sex" with on Jeffrey Epstein's private island while she was 17 years old [5 sources]. It is alleged to have happened in 2002, during an AI conference hosted by Epstein at his compound in the US Virgin Islands. [1 source]

See the sources in the footnotes of that article. If you disagree, don't just do it here, correct the WP article. I for one made sure I know what I'm talking about before I even started to do so. And Stallman isn't being silenced, either, he simply doesn't have a leg to stand on here.

Those citations in the Wikipedia page reference a deposition given by the victim many years after the alleged crimes occurred. When asked where she went to have sex with Minsky she answers “I believe it was” Epstein’s private island. That is not a strong statement of fact. She is using language which implies there is a possibility it may have happened elsewhere.

When asked when it happened, she answers “I don’t know”. This is why I question whether she was really 17 at the time.

There is a flight record that shows Minsky and the victim were together on the same flight, when the victim was 17 years old. But there is nothing that links that flight as occurring at the same time that the victim was directed to have sex with Minksy. Given that the victim was employed by Epstein for years, and reports that she basically traveled everywhere with him at the time, it's entirely plausible that they were two separate events. The reporting that links that flight with the victim's deposition is entirely speculative.

This is my understanding of the available evidence. But it is entirely possible I am missing something. If you think so, please share.

I very much disagree that defending the reputation of your dead friend should be called "splitting hairs".

On a partially related note, the abuse of language that has lead to the current definitions of "rape" and "sexual assault" is distressing. :(

I think it’s wrong to absolve Minsky of responsibility, though. He would have had to be pretty clueless to not at least wonder why all of these teenaged girls were hanging around Epstein’s place. Whether he knew doesn’t mean he did not still have sex with an underage girl. Claiming that he didn’t know she was underage seems shaky to me. At the very least he was taking advantage of a woman in the employ of Epstein who seduced/tried to seduce him. At the very least Minsky was involved in indirect, coerced sexual assault as the one having sex with her (if ended up doing so), even if Epstein is the mastermind. I think Minsky was smart enough to know what was happening. So that is why I disagree with RMS. I think calling it sexual assault done, perhaps unknowingly, by Minsky is an accurate description.

> I think it’s wrong to absolve Minsky of responsibility, though.

Stallman was not saying that Minsky should not be absolved of responsibility. He was just saying that the term "sexual assault" is inaccurate in that it implies violence.

> I think Minsky was smart enough to know what was happening.

That's a fairly large assumption. Minsky's name shows up twice in hundreds of pages of deposition. Once is in a statement by the victim when she is asked to name names:

> They instructed me to go to George Mitchell, Jean Luc Brunel, Bill Richardson, another prince that I don't know his name. A guy that owns a hotel, a really large hotel chain, I can't remember which hotel it was. Marvin Minsky.

And the only other reference (that I am aware of) is in reference to being on a private flight with a bunch of other people.

How are you able to infer so much from so litte information?

> He was just saying that the term "sexual assault" is inaccurate in that it implies violence.

Which is also incorrect. Sexual assault encompasses coercion without physical violence.

It is accurate to say that the girl was sexually assaulted; whether or not Minsky sexually assaulted her is up for debate.

I agree with the parent that it seems sketchy that Minsky (and the others present) didn't have at least some idea what was going on. At best, these girls could be prostitutes, but just assuming everything about the situation was completely legit is in my mind morally questionable.

Then there wass also a person present at the gathering who says Minsky turned the girl down. If she says that she had sex with him, I would tend to believe her, though.

> Which is also incorrect. Sexual assault encompasses coercion without physical violence.

I was actually reading Stallman's site last night, after seeing the article about him leaving CSAIL. I noticed he had a "glossary" section where he basically rejected the use of many common words and phrases, because their literal meaning did not match the colloquial or modern use (for example, he rejected the word homophobia, being pedantic about the phobia part). I'd bet this whole thing about "sexual assault" is along the same line.

It probably is. Stallman is a pedant in the worst possible way: he rejects reality in favor of textbook perfection.

Where the "reality" of language is a result of brutal culture wars that have given us very unnatural categories ("X means Y+Z except in very specific circumstances K where it means Y+W")?

In that case think its important for thinking clearly to develop your own definitions that group things together into categories where all members share important traits.

Not even! He rejects common language where he has redefined the words, and he rejects specific jargon where it runs contrary to common language.

When he uses the tools of pedantry, he does so to try and change the goalposts of the conversation, not to provide greater clarity.

> It is accurate to say that the girl was sexually assaulted; whether or not Minsky sexually assaulted her is up for debate.

“whether or not Minsky sexually assaulted her” is precisely the thing that Stallman was debating, and got into trouble for.

Indeed. The "best case" assumption that Minsky could have made was that Epstein was a procurer and a pimp.

Great you might be right but are you sorry people got to hear your opinion AND Stallman's? Would it be a better world if only your thoughts were heard or would you not even be sharing them if not for his thoughts being shared?

Did anyone silence, or threaten to silence, Stallman?