GNU FSF: Richard Stallman Returns
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ https://github.com/rms-support-letter/rms-support-letter.github.io/ Petition for freespeech, against cancel culture...
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ https://github.com/rms-support-letter/rms-support-letter.github.io/
Petition for freespeech, against cancel culture...
The support for RMS campaign currently now has 67% more sigs than the cancel culture campaign does, jumping 48% since last. Cancel culture losing. More sordid from land of virtual signallers... https://debian.community/molly-de-blanc-arrest-and-prosecution-for-cyberbull... https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringle... https://uncensored.debian.community/ https://danielpocock.com/positive-alternatives-to-codes-of-conduct/
-----Original Message----- From: cypherpunks [mailto:cypherpunks-bounces@lists.cpunks.org] On Behalf Of grarpamp Sent: Friday, 02 April, 2021 4:59 PM To: cypherpunks@cpunks.org Subject: Re: GNU FSF: Richard Stallman Returns
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ https://github.com/rms-support-letter/rms-support-letter.github.io/
Petition for freespeech, against cancel culture...
[snip]
More sordid from land of virtual signallers... https://debian.community/molly-de-blanc-arrest-and-prosecution-for-cyberbull...
[snip] grarpamp, first, you should know that I actually signed the letter in support of Stallman; you may visit https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ and Ctrl+F "lolwut" to confirm this. However, I take issue with that link to the article concerning Molly de Blanc. This is certainly not because I support de Blanc in any manner, but rather because the article treats as legitimate the nonsense concept of "cyberbullying". Even though I support Stallman, I cannot take seriously any article that calls for the legal prosecution of anybody -- including some cancel culture cretin -- over the meme that is "cyberbullying". You petition for free speech against cancel culture, which I wholly support; but can you, or at least the author of that article, not understand that this entire "cyberbullying" thing is entirely repugnant to free speech, and that it, in effect, makes illegal mean words and insults, which should always be protected speech? It's exactly the left-wing cancel-culture types, the ones who are so mentally soft and fragile that they cannot handle mean words on a computer screen, who always whine about "cyberbullying" and actually seek to make it illegal. Do not fall for their meme and thereby sink to their level.
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021, 4:04 PM lolwut <lolwut9001@cock.li> wrote:
that it, in effect, makes illegal
I'm a bit confused by the whole concept of "cancel culture". You describe it as free speech being made "in effect illegal" by people expressing their concerns (eg, in this case calling for RMS to be removed from the board). But aren't they just as free to speak their concerns, as the speech that created the concerns? And isn't the board fully within their rights to listen to the those concerns and weigh them in their decisions? Basically, is this actually a few speech issue, or do you just disagree with the perfectly legal decisions of the board, who are listening to the perfectly free feedback and concerns of the public? David
-----Original Message----- From: David Barrett [mailto:dbarrett@expensify.com] Sent: Friday, 02 April, 2021 7:38 PM To: lolwut Cc: cypherpunks@cpunks.org Subject: Re: GNU FSF: Richard Stallman Returns
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021, 4:04 PM lolwut <lolwut9001@cock.li> wrote:
that it, in effect, makes illegal
I'm a bit confused by the whole concept of "cancel culture". You describe it as free speech being made "in effect illegal" by people expressing their concerns (eg, in this case calling for RMS to be removed from the board). But aren't they just as free to speak their concerns, as the speech that created the concerns? And isn't the board fully within their rights to listen to the those concerns and weigh them in their decisions?
Basically, is this actually a few speech issue, or do you just disagree with the perfectly legal decisions of the board, who are listening to the perfectly free feedback and concerns of the public?
David
The main point was that I was criticizing the notion of "cyberbullying", because it's an idiotic concept that, if made into law, restricts freedom of speech. This criticism of mine persists outside of the particular RMS issue. I think that you are confused over the thing I was describing that makes free speech "in effect illegal": I was referring to laws against "cyberbullying", which is absolutely a form of censorship that reduces the amount of free speech; I was not referring to cancel culture, which does not make certain speech illegal, though it is nevertheless contemptible. Yes, I agree that Stallman's opponents are free to speak their concerns, and even insult him, which is why I took issue with the Molly de Blanc article that grarpamp linked to, because it is basically calling for censorship of de Blanc by means of the meme law of "cyberbullying". This is something that not even some moron of cancel culture deserves.
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021, 5:05 PM lolwut <lolwut9001@cock.li> wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: David Barrett [mailto:dbarrett@expensify.com] Sent: Friday, 02 April, 2021 7:38 PM To: lolwut Cc: cypherpunks@cpunks.org Subject: Re: GNU FSF: Richard Stallman Returns
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021, 4:04 PM lolwut <lolwut9001@cock.li> wrote:
that it, in effect, makes illegal
I'm a bit confused by the whole concept of "cancel culture". You describe it as free speech being made "in effect illegal" by people expressing their concerns (eg, in this case calling for RMS to be removed from the board). But aren't they just as free to speak their concerns, as the speech that created the concerns? And isn't the board fully within their rights to listen to the those concerns and weigh them in their decisions?
Basically, is this actually a few speech issue, or do you just disagree with the perfectly legal decisions of the board, who are listening to the perfectly free feedback and concerns of the public?
David
The main point was that I was criticizing the notion of "cyberbullying", because it's an idiotic concept that, if made into law, restricts freedom of speech. This criticism of mine persists outside of the particular RMS issue.
I think that you are confused over the thing I was describing that makes free speech "in effect illegal": I was referring to laws against "cyberbullying", which is absolutely a form of censorship that reduces the amount of free speech; I was not referring to cancel culture, which does not make certain speech illegal, though it is nevertheless contemptible. Yes, I agree that Stallman's opponents are free to speak their concerns, and even insult him, which is why I took issue with the Molly de Blanc article that grarpamp linked to, because it is basically calling for censorship of de Blanc by means of the meme law of "cyberbullying". This is something that not even some moron of cancel culture deserves.
Got it, thanks for the clarification! David
On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 16:37:55 -0700 David Barrett <dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:
Basically, is this actually a few speech issue, or do you just disagree with the perfectly legal decisions of the board, who are listening to the perfectly free feedback and concerns of the public?
"perfectly legal decisions of the board" - LMAO "concerns of the public" 'concerns' of non human feminazi trash you mean. So now we have barrett, yet another fascist turd in need of killing, gallantly defending the 'freedoms' of fascists.
David
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io
⚠️ As of April 1, 2021 00:00 UTC we are no longer accepting signatures.
The open letter isn't accepting signatures anymore. I wonder what happened? On 0X/04/2021 XX:XX, grarpamp wrote:
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ https://github.com/rms-support-letter/rms-support-letter.github.io/
Petition for freespeech, against cancel culture...
The support for RMS campaign currently now has 67% more sigs than the cancel culture campaign does, jumping 48% since last. Cancel culture losing.
More sordid from land of virtual signallers... https://debian.community/molly-de-blanc-arrest-and-prosecution-for-cyberbull... https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringle...
https://uncensored.debian.community/ https://danielpocock.com/positive-alternatives-to-codes-of-conduct/
-- Kcznsk kcznsk@tfwno.gf
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 04:59:28PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ https://github.com/rms-support-letter/rms-support-letter.github.io/
Petition for freespeech, against cancel culture...
The support for RMS campaign currently now has 67% more sigs than the cancel culture campaign does, jumping 48% since last. Cancel culture losing.
More sordid from land of virtual signallers... https://debian.community/molly-de-blanc-arrest-and-prosecution-for-cyberbull... https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringle...
https://uncensored.debian.community/ https://danielpocock.com/positive-alternatives-to-codes-of-conduct/
Do join and cancel the cancellers with free tools: https://github.com/parazyd/cancel On a more serious note, I'm glad that there is such an effort to show support for RMS publicly. And it's very much grassroots, all individuals signing because of their love and inspiration, rather than the "anti-letter" which is being signed by various companies and whatnot. It is also interesting to analyze the demographic of signatories on both letters (at least the name origin). Best regards, Ivan
Trying to swat the cancellers up into the rabid cop / prosecutor systems... jailed and lawmade for speech... seems as bad as the cancel culture and its rabid cancel teams are, though some will view system as form of warning or lodging note in case something escalates. Cancelees can make civil claims, tort, etc as well, but is often pointless once [even wrongful] damage is done. Nevermind that say 90% in rabid teams ever had any IRL interaction with any cancelee, let alone were ever directly personally had any (murder, rape, theft, against NAP, etc) by them, thus most in those hit squads are no more than third parties throwing down signalling noise, with even some actual victims playing games too. It's a mess, good luck sorting it.
"cyberbullying"
consider: Is Assassination Politics "cyberbullying"?
The open letter isn't accepting signatures anymore. I wonder what happened?
It got cancelled, apparently.
Do join and cancel the cancellers with free tools: https://github.com/parazyd/cancel
This is obviously the only correct answer ;)
the "anti-letter" which is being signed by various companies
As with Delta, many will find such statements by corporates to be disheartening, disturbing, corruption, worthy of boycott, etc. consider: Is "cancel" a grand disruption effort launched, seeding petty infights into opensource, distributed, cryptocurrency, libertarian, privacy, freedom movements... right at the very moment of their emerging ascendence over desperate legacy powers. Crypto mktcap $2T (1% privacy and growing)... fight the cancel, don't be disrupted, keep moving.
participants (7)
-
David Barrett -
grarpamp -
Ivan J. -
Karl Semich -
Kcznsk -
lolwut -
Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0