On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 10:19:28 +0200
"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <address@hidden> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:59:41PM -0300, Wilson Bustos wrote:
Which 'behavior' are you exactly talking about?
Perhaps
https://medium.com/@selamjie/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88
Thank you, GNU maintainers, for your statement.
Regards,
Florian
I would like to note a lot of articles on the Internet purposely
misquote Stallman. For example this header from your link:
"Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely
Willing’".
He didn't defend Epstein, he had actually called him a "serial rapist"
earlier, also in the mail he didn't say "victims", note the plural. He
also said the victim could be *presented* to Minsky as entirely willing,
he didn't say she actually was. Language is a really subtle tool and
small things like this can make a big change.
So please, be careful, when reading those articles and judge wisely,
especially because the situation is a really delicate matter.
I also found the link to arguments defending Stallman:
https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/
I don't really know what should I think about all of this, but it
would be a bit unjust if Stallman didn't have any defense, even if he
made a mistake.
Hope I won't get excluded from the project, because of my opinion,
Jan