[zihotki]

> People who are unstable enough to threaten suicide because of romantic rejection are a danger to others, not just themselves. For the first, the context (situational, non-verbal, etc.) matters, as it's explained in a number of articles about the subject.

I asked a few (non-representative anecdotal sample) womans (programmers, managers, etc.) around, they all considered it safe unless the person crosses the line and starts stalking or exibit any other kind of oppressive behaviour (coming/staying too close, "accidentally" touching, stealing your belongings, starts looking for a ways to be alone with you).

Everyone of course is different and the same situation could be interpreted differently by different people. Some could even overreact a single glance or intonation therefore we need to draw a line between harrasment and being a weirdo and don't jump to conclusions too early.

From what I currently see (I haven't been there and can judge only by media), the situation has been pushed from personal issue to a political leverage. And this is unacceptable. What could have been done instead? I don't know, may be an open letter from a few persons to ask him to be more polite and/or ask to seek consultation with a psychotherapist? But cancelling is not the way.

[ahelwer]

Again... we are talking about a long pattern of behavior. The entire point here is that Stallman faced no consequences for that incident! None! Intermediate consequences would have been nice, but none occurred! So here we have the tidal wave finally cresting over the barrier. And your response is to go back and litigate a single specific incident, saying it would have been nice if someone had written an open letter - where even that didn't happen? What kind of culture are you trying to build, exactly? The Free Software movement must include women. Sheltering leaders who sexually harass them goes against that aim. It's too late for Stallman, and protecting him here just tells all those women who were harassed without consequence that the movement does not want them. Just try to fix the process and pick better leaders going forward.

[zihotki]

And what makes you think there were no intermediate consequences about that? And what kind of consequences are you expecting? Cancel him out completely? Isn't it too radical? It seems like a standard predator behaviour to me, similar to one attributed to Stallman.

[ahelwer]

Here are some possible intermediate consequences: Stallman publicly admits wrongdoing, apologizes, specifies what beliefs led him to think those actions were appropriate, how he came to understand those beliefs were wrong, and what steps he will take in the future to not act in this way again. Maybe he also takes a leave of absence from one of his various roles. Maybe he commits to attending therapy for some length of time. Maybe the FSF or MIT directs some money to an organization supporting women in computer science. None of that happened. Nothing even close to that happened.