• TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Lol, you mean when he changed his opinion 4 days after his comments were outed, and only when it looked like his job was untenable?

    Seems awfully convenient that RMS would change his decades-held opinion that paedophilia is fine a mere 4 days after he found himself in hot water.

    • Adanisi@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It’s funny, because he didn’t get fired, he resigned. And he never returned to his previous position. It wasn’t about losing his job, or getting it back. It was that he grew and changed his opinion. Unless you believe people can’t grow?

      And the incident which made him do that (where he even said what was done is wrong!) is not related to the previous comments you’ve listed.

      Hey, wasn’t Bill Gates on Epstein’s flight logs? The same Bill Gates who claims he’s never been on any of his islands? Huh, someone with genuine connections and not just pedantic with words. Someone should really look into that. Funny how nobody brings up those who are actually involved.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        People in high up positions often “resign” when their position is no longer tenable.

        I don’t see why you’re bringing whataboutism about Gates into this. The discussion isn’t about Gates, nor do I like Gates.

        The discussion is about RMS being pro paedophilia, and his cult being in denial about that fact.

        • Adanisi@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          He still didn’t return to his position. And again, the things said that lead to him resigning are not related to his previous comments. And again, he actually denounced what happened, in that email chain. He absolutely wasn’t defending it. Go read it yourself, in full. Not some chopped up version.

          Hey, Stallman answers his emails, how about you ask him what his opinions are yourself?

          rms@gnu.org

          Also, I’m bringing up Gates because while there’s massive uproar over some misplaced pedantry a lifelong activist did (again, while denouncing what happened and saying Epstein is described too lightly), it seems eerily silent when it comes to people in the same sector actually having real connections to Epstein and not just unpopular opinions on how words should be used.

          • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I didn’t say he returned to his position.

            The entire thing led to him resigning. It was his comments on Epstein that got the ball rolling, but people bringing up his public championing of child rape using his work email address, as well as women alleging that he had been creepy with them, all led to him losing his position.

            Look, you can defend him all you want. That’s fine. I’m just on the “child rape is bad” side of the fence.

            • Adanisi@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              We’re on the same side of that fence, don’t think you’re smart by painting me as pro-pedo. It’s incredibly disingenuous and tells me you’re running out of arguments to stand on. Stallman is of the belief that that is bad, and has denounced Epstein’s actions. And even if he didn’t, he still did nothing himself, so I’m not sure how me making the point that Stallman isn’t the devil opponents say he is makes me belong on “that side of the fence”?

              The “creepy” allegations have all been debunked iirc. I’ve heard of one about a mattress in his office, which wasn’t even in his office or his mattress? I’ve also heard of him giving a business card (why is that creepy?). If you have any examples with actual evidence which isn’t just “I heard that she said that he said”, feel free to share and I’ll look.

              My point about him not returning to his previous position makes the argiment that him taking back his previous views wasn’t just to return to the job he had. As you said that he didn’t actually have a legitimate reason to change his opinion. Because if you don’t like someone, it means they never have a benign reason to change their opinions!