Elias @eliasr@librem.one

@silverwizard But now you are trying to somehow put the burden of proof on me, remember that you are the one making very serious allegations, then you are also the one who needs to present the basis you have for that.

The text by Bradley M. Kuhn that you referred to is great but it does not provide grounds for the accusations you are making. Then you had the Selam G text but that had that falsehood as a central part.

(to be continued)

@silverwizard If you agree to the above (that an accuser needs to present evidence and that the evidence should be based on facts, not lies, and that this is even more important if the allegation is serious), then I think you will also understand why I am not convinced and why it seems strange to me that you keep throwing such accusations when you apparently do not have a solid basis for them.

@silverwizard If you wanted to convince me, you would be better off to show something that does not have a lie in the center. It hurts the credibility of the rest of the information. It would have been much better to stay with facts.

Do you agree that when a serious allegation is made, it falls on the accuser to present solid basis for that accusation?

Do you agree that it is important to provide a basis for the allegation that is based on facts?

(to be continued)

@silverwizard Let me explain the situation this way:

You make a very serious allegation.

I assume we agree that when making an accusation, especially such a serious one, the accuser needs to present evidence.

When you present evidence that comes in the form of the Selam G post, which has as its centerpiece something that we both know is a lie.

(to be continued)

@hypolite @silverwizard wait, what? You think I should "stop interacting with strangers about this"?? @hypolite please explain what you mean by this, as it sounds like the exact opposite of what I think is needed here. I think we need more discussion with people who have different opinions, that is our best chance to understand how others think and to understand their point of view. I consider myself lucky to be able to reach @silverwizard here instead of having a complete echo chamber.

@silverwizard So to summarize what I wanted to say about those two links you mentioned: the Bradley M. Kuhn text is very good, I appreciate you bringing that up, but the Selam G text is not good, it is either very careless or deliberately dishonest. I hope I have succeeded in explaining why I think this. Do you understand what I mean about those two texts?

@silverwizard About the Selam G post "Remove Richard Stallman: Appendix A", note that it shows the headline "Renowned MIT Scientist Defends Epstein: Victims Were ‘Entirely Willing’" and describes that as doing a "great job covering" things. As you and I both know, that headline is deceitful, the statement is simply not true. Yes it is held up as "great". That kind of disregard for facts is very harmful to honest discussion, in my opinion. (to be continued)

@silverwizard I was not sure if you had read it, now I understand that you have. Good. Thank you.

Yes, I did read the statement by Bradley M. Kuhn. I like him very much and I appreciate this specific statement from him as well. Note that he does not make baseless accusations of any kind. He writes that RMS took a useful step by resigning. I tend to agree with that.

About the Selam G post... (to be continued)

@silverwizard I am not talking about any "ultimate authority", I just recommend that you read it. If you have read it, then that is good. If you have read it and it made no difference to you, that would be surprising to me.

Not sure exactly what you mean by remembering the events 2019. I remember RMS resigned and that it seemed to be in large part due to people getting the wrong idea about what was written in that email thread, but maybe you mean something else?

@silverwizard You asked the same yesterday, then I answered, then it seemed you were not really interested after all. The point i am trying to get across is that it is good to get informed first, before throwing around accusations. To understand why that is a good idea, maybe try thinking about what it would be like if someone accused you of something, without caring if claims were true or not. Treat others as you would like others to treat you.

@silverwizard Let me recommend this again: https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web

@abcdw I use bash because it's what I know and what most other people use. Regarding languages in general, I think it often makes sense to use the same language that other people use, so we can understand eachother.

@alexl@mstdn.io Yes, it's the downvote feature there, it has that effect. <No good if you want an honest debate about anything. There is some defense of him on r/StallmanWasRight if that's any consolation, but of course that's just because the downvote effect works in the opposite direction there. 😕

@kip@fosstodon.org It would be better to have that letter hosted elsewhere. Github is owned by Microsoft, probably RMS would not appreciate the choice of Github.

@clacke @davidrevoy Thanks @clacke for being the voice of reason. 🙂 Maybe worth noting that RMS is not back as "the leader" of FSF, he is not Executive Director (that is John Sullivan) and not President of the Board of directors (that is Geoffrey Knauth). RMS is right now one of six members of the Board of directors: https://www.fsf.org/about/staff-and-board Is that still too much of a leading role, I'm not sure, but anyway it is not the same as before.

@silverwizard @davidrevoy That text also says something about the kind of person RMS is, someone who cares a lot about right and wrong and who tends to be frank about his opinions, and how that influenced what happened. It also says something about how rumors can work, and at least for me that makes me think that we should be careful to check what basis we have before accusing someone. If the accusation is serious, that does not mean we should care less about what basis we have for it.

@silverwizard @davidrevoy That wetheweb text says several things that are relevant here, I really recommend reading it. If you did read it and thought it was nothing, then maybe go back and read again a bit more carefully. One thing it explains is about the thing that triggered it all, the contents of some emails, pointing out that RMS did in fact not say what people claimed. The truth matters, I think. Also... (to be continued)

@davidrevoy Are you sure you are not falling for a smear campaign here? I recommend reading this: https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web

@MatejLach See also: https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web