[flagged]
Salem G. made a mistake in desiring to address a problem that is worth discussing, but did so with a hasty ill-conceived reaction constructed through gossip and hearsay. It shouldn't happen, but it does.
The various publications should have checked their facts and performed due diligence, but something, anything MIT related is money in the bank right now. They sold out.
Breaking down Salem for her mistake isn't going to help Free Software, rms, or the FSF, but reason and facts, and holding the publications accountable for their disinformation by correcting it, will.
EDIT - I see that she is an adult with a job. I hope RMS sues and gets some damages. Defamation should have consequences.
She's really building weapons for the US department of defense.
I'm not doing anything, just doubting of her qualities as a spoke person of a movement that targeted RMS for no reason other than ignorance (taking for granted that there isn't anything else behind it)
If we can doubt Stallman as a leader, we can as well doubt Selam G.
And I'm saying it because she put herself there, nobody pressed her to write a hit piece titled "Remove Stallman and every other toxic person", she spoke as a movement leader, a toxic one if you ask me.
Remove is not a word I would ever use in regard to other people.
> The various publications should have checked their facts
That's why I think that she chose Vice for a reason, and not by coincidence.
I guess, but I can't prove it, that she was sure they would have listened and published the whole thing without checking, and even if they did, they would have published it anyway as it is.
It's too juicy.
I'm not trying to break her down, just exposing facts.
It is what it is, I haven't invented anything here.
People need to have all the informations available to make their own opinions.
No matter how much doubt you could reveal about her person, you will never see a headline: "MIT alumna found to be axe-murderer, RMS cleared and re-instated as FSF president".
She doesn't matter, and any attack on her will be seen as petty at best by those who only read the articles.
Any effort expended on her could have been expended on dispelled one of the falsehoods being propagated about rms.
The truth takes time and patience, and you can't expedite matters by stooping to the levels of those maliciously perpetuating this smear campaign.
I don't care about being being popular.
And I don't even care of being judged by internet nobodys, I'm over 40, I've grown some skin for teenager's shitty destructive behaviour.
I care about not covering facts.
She'll be paying for what she did in the future.
That's for sure, I would never trust at my job someone who leaks information like some sort of enemy spy.
Stallman has a reputation, she doesn't.
Alan Turing was incarcerated for being gay, after all he did for his country.
At least Stallman roams free (for now).
But I've canceled my yearly donation to FSF and I encourage everyone I know to do the same.
It was (physically) a drop in the ocean to help them doing the right thing, not what is popular at the moment.
And I did it despite disagreeing with Stallman on different points, I knew it was for a good cause, now I don't care if they burn in hell, they're just like Google or Apple to me.
If they can't defend their most honorable member, they can't defend anybody.
If they prefer to be on the side of those building killing machines, it's their right.
But they've become useless.
If they had some self respect, they would shutdown the FSF for good.
> Any effort expended on her could have been expended on dispelled one of the falsehoods being propagated about rms.
I did it on several occasions.
And I'll keep doing it.
The two things are not at odds, I can do both.
He has been fired. I don't much care for people like him but he is not part of the problem with Vice.
> She's really building weapons for the US department of defense
Can I get a link or reference for this? It is a big fact...
He left on his own, at the top of his career, while he was still admired as "the godfather of hipsterism"
He turned from hipster god to far right extremist
And that's more or less what happens to everyone thinking to be "edgy" and "modern" and "free" when they start to understand they have power over people's life.
They become shitty persons.
Stallman never became one, because he was always unpopular, boring, pedantic, never cared for power or money or being socially acceptable and that's why he's been a good person after all.
> Can I get a link or reference for this? It is a big fact...
If you write a piece titled "remove Stallman and all the other toxic people" and you build weapons, I understand better why you build them and what you really meant by "remove".