News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman by rndgermandude on Monday September 30, 2019 @07:35AM (#21114072)
He was witch-hunted on the internet by a serial witch-hunter, some "journalists" who lack basic reading comprehension and the lynch mob that ensured. It's naive to believe he resigned voluntarily. He was pressured into it, probably believed the witch-hunters, lynchmobgoers and finger pointers to a certain degree that he indeed is evil, resigned to protect what he created and therefore was nice enough to not shit all over the institutions he created on his way out.

His reputation was set on fire and burned to the ground, he was expelled from his life's work, might even have become homeless as a direct result, and most of the people he considered friends or friendly vanished over night (tho, some remain as you pointed out, but decidedly few) destroying most of his social (support) network.

Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman by viraptor on Monday September 30, 2019 @08:07AM (#21114363)
He built a global movement challenging people publically and he's happy to semi-publically state his opinions about sexual assault at the worst possible time, but he will stay silent about pressure to step down to be nice? I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that.
Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman by rndgermandude on Monday September 30, 2019 @08:14AM (#21114431)
>He built a global movement challenging people publically

Exactly, is it hard to imagine he doesn't want to take a blow torch to his own creation just as a last "fuck you" farewell?

>happy to semi-publically state his opinions about sexual assault

He said sexual assault is bad. How dare he?!

Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman by tomclive on Monday September 30, 2019 @09:19AM (#21115039)
He rejects the term 'Sexual Assault' completely. https://stallman.org/antiglossary.html#assult

There's plenty of troubling stuff in his writing.

Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman by sergioj97 on Monday September 30, 2019 @10:52AM (#21115976)
Reading your link, I don't find anything troubling. He says the term is too ambiguous and it makes it easy to (potentially maliciously) misrepresent someone's acts.

If you find anything else he's said troubling please provide me some references as I'm trying to read anything that may help me to understand this episode. (I've already read about his former and present opinions on paedophilia)

Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman by rndgermandude on Monday September 30, 2019 @09:28AM (#21115104)
Yes, he rejects the specific term as too non-specific, not that there is sexual violence at all.