You are assuming that Aqua implies that Stallman publishing his personal opinions in his blog was the issue. While this might be true, for me at least the real revelations were posts like https://twitter.com/migueldeicaza/status/1173981287037751297 and https://twitter.com/jilliancyork/status/1173898047878598656 - which constitute actual unacceptable behaviour but can't easily be verified.

I'm sorry, but:

"I hosted rms many years ago in the 90’s, what was supposed to be hosting your hero for a ~3 day thing became a ~2 month nightmare."

Did Miguel ask him to leave? Or did he just sit around passive-aggressively for 3 whole months? Also, rms called Miguel "a traitor to the Free Software community" at some point, and now with the whole MIT business, he gets in with the twitter defamation league spouting off his grievances. That's pretty much beyond cowardly and into despicable territory.

Jillian's story is pretty much the entire problem in a nutshell:

"an older female colleague recommended at a whisper that I lock myself in my office."

"She later told me it was because he gets touchy"

"Over the years, I heard all sorts of things of this nature, and warned women who might not be in the know"

Maybe this older female colleague was told the same things at some point? Why is every single allegation hearsay from twitter?

"instructing them on how to properly make tea"

Yes, rms can be very particular about minor things. If you did not know even this, why are you writing about "things about rms others should know"?

Also, again EFF connections. Do they even want to pretend to be useful anymore, outside of cluelessly abusing people on twitter for kicks?

You are sorry about what? I myself said that these stories can't easily be verified. I only suggested an alternative understanding of Aqua's post to tutfbhuf

Sorry about not finding myself in agreement over what would be a "real revelation", but I might have misunderstood. My apologies.

What is the exact unacceptable behaviour that you linked to? (Sorry, navigating twitter sucks, I honestly am unsure what you're talking about). From the second link I get two things - second-hand tale that "he gets touchy" (hasn't ever happened to her directly I guess? Or we would've known). And first-hand tale that he abused organizers by instructing them how to make tea; she assumes it's because organizers are women, but from what I know RMS would abuse organizers regardless of gender. He was weird and hard to live with, much less please. Yes I can believe that (it's something that Miguel de Icaza apparently complains about). But this is not a crime!

The tea case and the de Icaza case might not be crimes but they are still unacceptable behaviour imo.

You don't have to like him to recognise injustice.

People are literally celebrating a "long overdue" injustice because they don't like the man, so "he had it coming". I don't know how can anyone not find this unsetting.

> You don't have to like him to recognise injustice.

I never said otherwise. If you look at my comment history you will see that I am against the injustice against RMS.

I'm sorry, but like I already stated, both tweets you linked were published after the initial story went viral. I'm not saying these people are lying, I'm saying I tend to take such revelations with a grain of salt after reading "trust me, I'm lying", I highly recommend it if you've got a few spare hours. In short, blogs, popular twitter accounts and so on tend to lie and spread misinformation in order to gain more followers. I don't know these people, I don't know if whatever they claim is credible, thus I don't automatically assume they speak the truth.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21099513

I certainly agree with you.