Disaster Richard Stallman resigns from the Free Software Foundation and his position at the MIT

RMS has resigned from some honorary position at MIT.

To the MIT community,
I am resigning effective immediately from my position in CSAIL at MIT. I am doing this due to pressure on MIT and me over a series of misunderstandings and mischaracterizations.
Richard Stallman
Vice Article
 
Last edited:
Where is the cutoff?
Death. As Sam Hyde said, "these people want you broke, dead, your kids raped and brainwashed, and they think it's funny." That's not an exaggeration and it's certainly not (just) a joke anymore.

I respectfully disagree with @break these cuffs's very eloquent post (thanks for the article link, btw; that's some good reading right there). These people want you dead. All of them, every last one of them, will openly scream for (and work towards) your total destruction if you offend the mob. Losing your job, your source(s) of income, your kids, your spouse, your home, your security, your physical safety, your goddamn dog, everything. Some will go even further and actually admit they'd prefer you dead.

The ones who won't openly admit they want someone dead when they say "canceled" are still complicit in it -- they just prefer not to think too hard about the likely outcomes of actually canceling someone from society (which is ultimately what they want). So it's more a kind of death wish by omission -- they don't consciously believe they want people to die over their disagreements ... they just don't care to think beyond that punishment "score." Zoe Quinn did this to the game developer who killed himself recently, and her defenders leaped straight to this defense: she took deliberate action that caused serious, irrevocable harm to his life and he ended up dead as a direct result, but since she didn't literally pull the trigger to shoot him dead, she technically didn't literally kill him. So she's "innocent," you see! Anyone who reasons like that still wants you dead; they just leap through a few hoops to square it up in their head so they don't feel like a ghoul.

I believe this because there's no "redemption" offered by this cancel culture. We've seen it countless times ... someone offends the mob, apologizes profusely and does everything they possibly can to appease the mob, but it's not enough and the mob refuses to be placated. The punishment still comes anyway, and the sinner is forever canceled. There's no way to get "back in their good graces." Game over. Might as well die for all they care, because you've been canceled and you're never coming back.

There's something very vicious underlying all this cancel culture behavior. This is worse than the old school witch hunts. These people don't care about collateral damage. They didn't go after families in Salem, but I've yet to hear any of these mob-happy lunatics offer even a hand wave to questions like "well what about his wife or children?" They don't give one shit about the families of their victims if they can't turn those people against the victim. Guilty by association, and the penalty is the same for them all if they won't repent and convert. Look at how many people want something horrible to happen to Bannon Trump. The kid literally did nothing wrong but people want him hurt (or worse) just because of his family.

It honestly feels like a regression from modern civilization. This is some tribal shit you'd expect from Africa, not civilized places like America. And yet here it is -- people reverting to near-animals when they're offended and then doing everything they can to end lives in revenge (whether they ultimately pull literal triggers or not).
 
No need to be so dramatic. They might want someone dead but once they lay low (no news articles them in a few months) the twitter mob will move on to someone else and forget. They are not the mafia sending out hits on people they don't like.
 
No need to be so dramatic. They might want someone dead but once they lay low (no news articles them in a few months) the twitter mob will move on to someone else and forget. They are not the mafia sending out hits on people they don't like.
I'm not so sure about that. Sarah Mei was on Twitter bitching out anyone who was open to offering RMS housing, wondering why they would do such a thing when they could give their free room to an indigenous climate change activist instead.

That's not a joke.
 
I'm not so sure about that. Sarah Mei was on Twitter bitching out anyone who was open to offering RMS housing, wondering why they would do such a thing when they could give their free room to an indigenous climate change activist instead.

What an absolutely monstrous cunt. She'd probably spit on him if she saw him homeless in the gutter. These "people" are absolute subhuman ghouls and the sooner they go to hell the better.
 
I'm not so sure about that. Sarah Mei was on Twitter bitching out anyone who was open to offering RMS housing, wondering why they would do such a thing when they could give their free room to an indigenous climate change activist instead.

That's not a joke.
Bitching out is not the same thing as physically threatening someone's safety. Outside of some limited Antifa incidents I don't think we've reached that level yet.
 
Bitching out is not the same thing as physically threatening someone's safety. Outside of some limited Antifa incidents I don't think we've reached that level yet.
No, it isn't. But it's one of those things that just further reinforces that they ultimately want their enemies, at BEST, begging for loose change on a street corner, if not outright dead.
 
No need to be so dramatic. They might want someone dead but once they lay low (no news articles them in a few months) the twitter mob will move on to someone else and forget. They are not the mafia sending out hits on people they don't like.
The only reason the mob ever moves on is because they are idiots with a short attention span, not because of any planned ending point. Any relief that their targets can find is accidental on their part. I agree with everyone here that they basically want their targets to die and just don't put enough specific thought into it. It's like they're playing whack-a-mole. Just because the mole disappears from their line of sight does not mean they don't have every intention of hitting the mole again the next time they are reminded it exists.

I believe this because there's no "redemption" offered by this cancel culture. We've seen it countless times ... someone offends the mob, apologizes profusely and does everything they possibly can to appease the mob, but it's not enough and the mob refuses to be placated. The punishment still comes anyway, and the sinner is forever canceled. There's no way to get "back in their good graces." Game over. Might as well die for all they care, because you've been canceled and you're never coming back.
I agree with this, and sometimes I wonder if this is the big reason why so many of the righteous inquisitors have such a ridiculous history of infractions and abuse to the point it's much worse than the people they're accusing. The frothing rage mentality of the mob comes from the fact that you get punished for asking questions or seeking evidence, which drives the mind into a state of perpetual terror and frenetic panic. In the context of interpersonal relationships we recognize that as emotional abuse, but on the societal scale it's treated as a righteous "movement".

So while the comparison of child molesters hiding in the priesthood by counting on the zeitgeist idea that priests are above question is valid - of course the Ron Toyes of the world love to be able to say "investigate everyone but not me because I'm part of the clergy and we're above scrutiny" - how much of it might be that they are irrationally driven into wielding the whip against their own actions projected onto others? I read a sad story once about a dog that was constantly screamed at, threatened, scowled at. Never once in its life received a pat on the head or even a smile from its owner. The owner never once became physically abusive but the dog knew the score - the dog understood it was hated, and in a bit of classic learned helplessness the dog understood that it could do nothing to ameliorate the situation because trying anything only got it more ire; trying nothing was proof to the owner it should be punished and trying something was proof to the owner it should be punished. It was a news story because the poor animal went crazy and chewed its own foot off in a desperate act of self-flagellation. So is that what the inquisitors are doing, the ones we constantly catch in their own guilt? Ron Toye is just trying to chew off Vic Mignogna's foot instead of his own because humans are craftier and more selfish than dogs? He knows nothing he can ever do will wash away his sins if the mob turns its eyes on him so his best bet is to go frothing mad at another target, even more fervently than anyone else is because then he has the extra insurance of saying "hey wait a minute why aren't you quite as enraged at Vic as I am?" More and more rage is the only defense available to an animal that has been taught being logical and solving the puzzle peacefully are crimes equal to the accusation in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Back