I don't know if it's true and already public, but how can you write that publicy about someone, you must be a profesional to diagnose someone and still that's very personal information.
Even more, he's acusing Stallman of being "poorly socialized because nobody taught him manner", so revealing somone mental issues publicy must make him very well socliazied and good manerered.
Also, "poorly socialized because nobody taught him manner" sounds subjective and I feel has no place in a piece like this.
Other than that, I think the author has mostly valid and excellent points.
"The FSF should have nurtured and grown new leaders a long time ago, leaders who looked into the future, understand cloud and mobile computing and their threats to a free society.
...
I never heard anyone at the FSF ask what it means for a digital society that Facebook has been legally using free software to develop algorithms that modify human behavior. Quite the opposite, the problem was javascript in the browser for apps like Gmail."
I wish the author had taken his own titular advice, though...the post would be better for it.
And if you're evaluating a spokesman, which is a role Stallman has to fill, being unusually awkward is a strong disqualifier.
So he's not bringing this up from nowhere.
> I don't know if it's true and already public, but how can you write that publicy about someone, you must be a profesional to diagnose someone and still that's very personal information.
I don't like charges of mental problems. I think when people go for a cheap shot it's usually one of the holy trinity of stupid, crazy or mean. And people like to dress a cheap shot up with some Latin or Greek; worse still is when a pro does exactly what you're complaining about.
In this case, though, he's sticking to what I can condone. I've already pointed out how it's relevant, and that he's bringing it up to respond to charges others have already made.
The other factor is he's not trying to pretend he has any medical qualification or that they even matter:
> He is socially inept, whether incapable because of his Asperger brain or poorly socialized because nobody taught him manners is a moot point.
It's okay to observe someone is socially inept as that's something most adults can intuit. And he also tries to humanize Stallman:
> He has mental issues and nobody cared enough about them to help him.
That's indicting people around Stallman more than Stallman himself. Because of that, I think this is acceptable discourse.
[0]https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
[1]https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
It's necessary to be able to critique leaders. Discussing a person's mind with regard to their fitness for leadership is not the same as making a personal attack at somebody's mental health.
There's one particular leader who comes to mind... I know many people would have no problem publicly asserting that this leader clearly has some sort of mental/cognitive/emotional problems.
I like Stallman, and even if he is mad as a hatter and offends the whole progressive world - he is still right about the only thing about him that interests me - his opinion and work on software freedom and privacy.