Nobody wishes him ill, but he has no place as a leader in the free software movement if it is to flourish. Of course, he can participate, and as president of GNU that might be an OK level of participation.
Do not expect us to believe he has been treated unfairly, however: he has been treated the same way any other employee at MIT would be treated, and as the FSF has seen fit given its organisational goals.
[citation needed] and distraction. So what if he didn't do anything of what he is currently accused of, I am sure he has done lots of wrong before (of which I am going to list exactly nothing)?
> he has been treated the same way any other employee at MIT would be treated.
He has resigned to shield MIT from public pressure after lots of lies have appeared about things he hasn't said.
I mean... it's plainly obvious given what happened that plenty of people do.
Beside it's not like the media is lacking in energy to spend on inciting social justice mobs.
Why does this community care so much about what happens to this asshole?
It is a false dichotomy, you are pretending that defending the injustice done to Stallman somehow takes away focus from other injustices which is not at all apparent.
The community cares so much about him because he has done significant amounts for the good of humanity. Some people blown up by a drone strike aren't known at all by the community and haven't proven themselves to be invaluable. It's the same reason that you would be sad when a person close to you dies and yet you don't feel the same way when some African kid starves.
People indeed get fired for smaller infractions but those people haven't even closely created as much value as Stallman.
The comparison with the African kid went over my head because approximately none of the people pouring so much effort into being outraged that Stallman got fired have a close personal connection with him. Sure, I’m more upset when a friend suffers than when a stranger does. But you’re not friends with Stallman, are you?