From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesse Gibbons Subject: Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 07:52:46 -0600 Message-ID: References: <87ftk4hbhu.fsf@gnu.org> <20191008081928.mcg7oxb3q5jp6nhr@pelzflorian.localdomain> <20191008123253.00a44e6b@kompiuter> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45202) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iHpv1-0000dn-AI for Guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 09:52:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iHpv0-0001qW-2Z for Guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 09:52:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20191008123253.00a44e6b@kompiuter> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Jan , "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" Cc: Guix-devel , GNU Guix maintainers On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 12:32 +0200, Jan wrote: > On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 10:19:28 +0200 > "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" 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-a7e41e78 > > 4f88 > > > > 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 Well, after reading both articles I learned some things about RMS I didn't want or need to know. My concerns are resolved. ==Please leave me out of further replies.==