Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
Fortunately his latest one there shows he is growing as a person. "I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why."
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
> I take back what I said of hate propaganda. You were just recollecting RMS's messages up to the most recent one. Thank you for retracting your statement. I regret that the message is so long, but I purposely wanted to be as comprehensive and fair as I could in answering the question.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
El 18/9/19 a les 15:22, kopole...@riseup.net ha escrit: >> That is hate propaganda. > > No, I was merely answering J.B. Nicholson-Owens question namely: "but > I'd like to know if anyone here has any idea what they're referring to?" > > I merely gave a verbatim list of Stallman's statements on pedophilia, > not misquoting him or taking it out of context. I even included > Stallman's most recent statement, which importantly only came four days > ago, a day after the Vice and Daily Dot stories were originally published. > > Facts and quotes in proper context aren't propaganda. Please, use a new "RMS trisquel" mailing list to continue this "full-of-sense" thread in current context. There you will have very interested people to chat about RMS, antarctic penguins and many other matters you want to develop.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
On 18/09/19 15:22, wrote: > I even included Stallman's most recent statement, which importantly > only came four days ago, a day after the Vice and Daily Dot stories > were originally published. I reckon you did. But for the most of people don't bother to read to the end of such a long text (including me), this won't be evident. I take back what I said of hate propaganda. You were just recollecting RMS's messages up to the most recent one. -- Ignacio Agulló · grafot...@grafotema.com
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
> That is hate propaganda. No, I was merely answering J.B. Nicholson-Owens question namely: "but I'd like to know if anyone here has any idea what they're referring to?" I merely gave a verbatim list of Stallman's statements on pedophilia, not misquoting him or taking it out of context. I even included Stallman's most recent statement, which importantly only came four days ago, a day after the Vice and Daily Dot stories were originally published. Facts and quotes in proper context aren't propaganda.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
On 18/09/19 13:15, wrote: > > Richard Stallman comments regarding pedophilia: Stallman says, and you can check it out on his own website, that he no longer thinks that way. What you are doing is to dig out Stallman's most controversial statements from his past and presenting them as if they were still actual. That is hate propaganda. -- Ignacio Agulló · grafot...@grafotema.com
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
>> As a result I don't know what they're talking about... I've asked name at domain what these comments are, since they wrote that post to their own blog, but I'd like to know if anyone here has any idea what they're referring to? Richard Stallman comments regarding pedophilia: "Dubya has nominated another caveman for a federal appeals court. Refreshingly, the Democratic Party is organizing opposition. [Reference updated on 2018-05-10 because the old link was broken.] The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness. Some rules might be called for when these acts directly affect other people's interests. For incest, contraception could be mandatory to avoid risk of inbreeding. For prostitution, a license should be required to ensure prostitutes get regular medical check-ups, and they should have training and support in insisting on use of condoms. This will be an advance in public health, compared with the situation today. For necrophilia, it might be necessary to ask the next of kin for permission if the decedent's will did not authorize it. Necrophilia would be my second choice for what should be done with my corpse, the first being scientific or medical use. Once my dead body is no longer of any use to me, it may as well be of some use to someone. Besides, I often enjoy rhinophytonecrophilia (nasal sex with dead plants)." - RMS - https://stallman.org/archives/2003-mar-jun.html "Dutch pedophiles have formed a political party to campaign for legalization. [Reference updated on 2018-04-25 because the old link was broken.] I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing." - RMS - https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%202006%20(Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party "There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children. Granted, children may not dare say no to an older relative, or may not realize they could say no; in that case, even if they do not overtly object, the relationship may still feel imposed to them. That's not willing participation, it's imposed participation, a different issue." - RMS - https://stallman.org/archives/2013-jan-apr.html#04_January_2013_(Pedophilia And for completeness sake. "Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it. Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why." - RMS - https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September_2019_(Sex_between_an_adult_and_a_child_is_wrong)
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
Our local Tech site mikrobitti.fi published an article headlining "RMS in trouble defends Epstein – the girls were all willing. They "fixed" the text after receiving critical negative feedback about misrepresentation but the falsehoods are still in the headline.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
This a thousand times over! The apparent crime he did was to even question the structure of the legal system. That is still taboo it appears.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
The reports contain distortions and falsehoods. I urge people to read what he actually wrote (the full unedited thing and not just quotes from places in order to see the things in their full context) and think about it.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
> I'd like to know if anyone here has any idea what they're referring to? Hard to say, but he has said a lot of really wild stuff in his life. But, he's always been a provocateur, who views part of his purpose as challenging people on the words they use and on the way those word choices affect laws, politics, religion, marriage relationships, etc. It's no surprise whatsoever that someone who is trying to be outraged could find something to be outraged about by Stallman's speeches or writings about sex or other controversial topics. He never ever shied away from talking about the "taboo" subjects or being labeled politically incorrect, not that I've ever seen. At the same time, the SFC is basically a Google-funded mouthpiece for promoting their favorite "open source" projects, and promoting "open source" work as being equivalent to "libre" counterparts. Little wonder that Google, who took huge hits from Stallman over the years, would bankroll a hit job on him.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
When are you going to add a desktop screenshot to our thread in the troll lounge?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
Well i kind of doubt Stallman doesn't speak for the free software movement. I just think he isn't the only person to speak for it. That's all... But yeah, T3g don't get me wrong, I have no idea why, but I missed your foolishness. Just like I missed Jodiendo. meh, if this is trolling, well played friend. :o
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
Then, please use this mailing list for its scope. Join to an "individuals debate" list to talk about the good and the bad of somebody that is not subscribed here. (and invite him) El 17/9/19 a les 19:45, commodore...@gmail.com ha escrit: > Everybody in the free software movement speaks for free software as > individuals.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
Everybody in the free software movement speaks for free software as individuals.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
Without Stallman there would be no free software movement. In the 80s people were suing each other into oblivion over shareware. As a result of the lawsuits, Stallman came up with the idea of copy left and created the GPL. But left to their own devices and without Stallman's vision and leadership, the free software folks of the day were a pathetic group who were never going to create anything lasting.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
On 17/09/19 18:28, wrote: > https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-speak-for-us/ First time ever I hear from these people. -- Ignacio Agulló · grafot...@grafotema.com
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
On 09/17/2019 12:04 PM, Narcis Garcia wrote: > The "Nobody lasts forever" thread already was off-topic. Speaking of that, whatever happened to freedom-misc? -- Caleb Herbert KE0VVT 816-892-9669 https://bluehome.net/csh <>
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
The "Nobody lasts forever" thread already was off-topic. Please, stop this subject to not deploy unuseful discussion. El 17/9/19 a les 18:28, tegskywal...@hotmail.com ha escrit: > https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-speak-for-us/
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
Its a micro of all the infighting happening right now in the world. good news is free software will always exists as long as ppl can give things away for free. publickey - davidpgil@protonmail.com - 0x01EB3346.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
This in-fighting scares me very much. <>
[Trisquel-users] Richard Stallman Does Not and Cannot Speak for the Free Software Movement
https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-speak-for-us/
