Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Resigns from MIT over Epstein Comments

> Last week, Motherboard published the full email thread in which Stallman wrote that the “most plausible scenario” is that Epstein’s underage victims in his campaign of trafficking were “entirely willing." Stallman also argued about the definition of “rape" and whether the term applies to the victims.

The link to "email thread" points not to the thread itself, but the previous article in the Motherboard series:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-sci...

Scrolling down, the thread is published. The top (last) message is:

> No one on this thread has accused Giuffre [Epstein's accuser] of lying. Rather, the discussion has been of whether Giuffre actually accused Minsky of sexual assault or not. I will not step into that discussion, but will instead ask the following meta question: "if someone in csail says in this discussion group that Minsky was accused of sexual assault, a very serious accusation, and someone else in csail thinks that he was not, should the latter person refrain from saying so in this same discussion group out of concern that the conversation will leak and be misconstrued by the press?"

>

> The "s" in stands for "science". The job of scientists is to evaluate evidence and seek truth. We have a social responsibility to do that as well. I hope that we scientists will never evade our social responsibility to seek and defend the truth out of fear that the press will misconstrue our search. That would not be a reputation I would like attached to my affiliation.

The idea that no question is off limits is a recent arrival thanks to science. Human history has shown just how fragile this stance is. It's shocking to see how quickly things can devolve, driven by the rage of people who I suspect have the best of motives.

Although this resignation was absolutely necessary, I wish outlets like The Daily Beast and Vice would stop misconstruing Stallman's email. He said that Epstein's victim likely presented herself to Minsky as willing under Epstein's direction, not that she actually was willing. This is still an unconscionable "defense" on Stallman's part (and only one link in a long chain of dubious statements and behavior w.r.t. these issues on his part), but the misquotes just become grist for his defenders who want to portray him as a victim of an unjustified witch hunt.

How is this not bigger news on HN?

Chalk up another scalp for the neopuritans.