https://www.google.com/search?q=pedophile+site%3Astallman.or...
He has changed his views on some topics over the years, including this: https://stallman.org/archives/2019-sep-dec.html#14_September...
Somebody who always says what he thinks without giving any thought to how it will be perceived, how it will affect his future relationships with people, his employment etc is probably not the person who will follow Hillary Clinton's lead and have "a public and a private" opinion.
https://rms-open-letter.github.io/
and the incidents they cite:
https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix
I find that the signatories seem to be conflating expressions of opinion with action, and demand extreme action in the face of a collection of statements-of-opinion which they disagree with. But even this is not the worst part of the demand: The letter is not really targeting RMS - it targets anyone who is willing to _tolerate_ RMS, and specifically the FSF board.
It is imperative IMHO that this initiative be fended off, unless you'd like an FSF - and other NGOs - which shudders in fear at the thought of making statements or taking positions which are not in-line enough with mainstream politics. And they will be sure to police each other, since a rhetorical vice by one is a capital offense by all.
And that's all before getting into RMS' neuro-atypicality; and the fact that board membership is not management of the FSF; etc. I just don't think the appropriate defense here should focus on RMS.
https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_002
The most popular proposal seems to be "Call on the FSF to further its governance processes", but "Denounce the witch-hunt against RMS and the FSF" and the support letter are also among the proposals.
Given what he has achieved in his life that has benefited everyone of us, I'm amazed HN folk are so quick to go along with cancelling him. Shame on you.
Senseless cancel culture needs to stop.
I think this is covered in Jared Diamond's Collapse. During the Salem Witch Trials, there was a point where a good chunk of the accusations were motivated by getting someone out of the way, so they could get their land, or otherwise by land disputes.
Also covered there: Much of the Rwandan genocide seems to have been exploited by land and resource disputes.
Power corrupts. If you give people unchecked power, then that power will be abused. This is just human nature. One group of people who frequently get unchecked power are activists. The press is supposed to the one of their checks and balances, but they are frequently giving only softballs and a free pass. Often fellow journalists even prevent further investigations. This also worked against the aims of the #MeToo movement in the past. This kind of press manipulation needs to be called out. It shouldn't happen.
Many accusations at this point are likely to be exploited for ulterior motives. There's just too much unchecked power in such accusations now to expect otherwise.
I have come to realize that just jumping on the outrage train is not a good strategy and in fact can be dangerous. One must take the time to understand all the facts and only then come to a conclusion.
This is how we get away from the pathologies of the mob -- We as a society need to regain our respect for due process, "innocent until proven guilty," and evidence!
Lots of people fantasize about what they would have done, had they lived in dark historical period X. Well, consider this a half strength test.
So when the story first broke out in 2019, my first reaction was "This is simply not possible." Of course, upon researching further in depth, I agree with the sentiments in the linked site and still strongly support Stallman.
I have come to realize that just jumping on the outrage train is not a good strategy and in fact can be dangerous. One must take the time to understand all the facts and only then come to a conclusion. For example, there are huge differences between the Susan Fowler and Ellen Pao stories whereas lot of people just treat them as the same.
Anyway, my 2 cents - get all the necessary background information first before labelling and assassinating the character of a person.