[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.