>there's a difference between pressuring the premier free software org to prioritize the comfort of many people over the comfort of one, and accusing someone of a crime.
I think this gets to the heart of the issue. The difference between these two has been muddied significantly in the internet age.
@mithrandir @tindall not convinced it was unintentional
bad actors LOVE to strawenby everything. it means they can easily attack fake stuff that is easy to attack rather than actually confronting the real argument. in this case, the stallman letter to me is fundamentally about the harmful environment created by stallman's presence, which drives vulnerable minorities out of free software, and that has a very negative effect on free software as a whole
the pro stallman people turned this into "those evil folks are attacking stallman because they hate him and want to slander his name and cancel culture etc" because, see, that's an easy strawenby. now, there's an easy obviously counterable fake thing to counter against, plus you can easily dehumanize the people involved as uwu cancel culture mob. textbook right-wing-style bad actor move imo
@haskal @mithrandir @tindall What makes this argument extra annoying is like, those mobs /do/ exist! This totally isn't one of them, though. But by going "it's a cancel culture mob!!", they're delegitimizing any future concerns when said mobs /do/ actually come up.
> those mobs /do/ exist!
> This totally isn't one of them, though
Excuse me but if you think that, then I really think you should read and think some more about it. I recommend reading this: https://edsantos.eu/on-stalman/
@haskal @mithrandir @tindall@cybre.space
