Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman
by icebraining on Monday September 30, 2019 @08:14AM
(#21114433)
> it sounds like it wasn’t far enough outside the acceptable conduct to warrant anything.
That's not how things work. Workplace "justice" is quite dependent on things like internal politics and personal affiliations. You can't rely tell how bad something was by the disciplinary response.
Consequently it might be correct to reserve judgement, like the author implies.
Stallman is such an annoyance that if there were a credible harassment allegation against him, the MIT administration would have almost certainly made use of it before this.
Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman
by icebraining on Monday September 30, 2019 @07:48PM
(#21120736)
There was a pretty big change in 2016. How sure are you that had no effect on his internal political situation?
If we don’t have a specific account and details are unknown, then I don’t think this is a fair characterization.
Ive had others think Stallman is creepy too. They actively avoided him, but he never did anything to them.
Sexual advances in and of themselves are not illegal - but again we don’t have a true source for this information. Assuming this is all 100% factually accurate and the sentiment is properly related: it sounds Inappropriate, but if he wasn’t fired, it sounds like it wasn’t far enough outside the acceptable conduct to warrant anything.