[drenvuk]

I'm tired of people with poor reading comprehension and poor adherence to the intent of the writing.

You equate this: "Having a photo or drawing does not hurt anyone" to "child pornography does not hurt anyone".

Do you really think those two sentences mean the same thing? Really? This is the reason the following saying is a thing.

>Give me six lines written by the most honest man in the world, and I will find enough in them to hang him.

Stop being so aggressively bad in finding faults. I mean, just being realistic, Stallman has most likely been stopped and searched multiple times crossing borders. You'd think if he was a pedo he would've been caught by now. Instead he's speaking his mind about censorship and freedom yet people that will never have an iota of the drive this guy had at least once in his life are trying to tear him down.

Do you take some sort of pride in attacking him or something? Regardless of his flaws, what have you done?

[yur3i__]

No I don't, until fairly recently i was an ardent supporter of RMS and still do support him in most aspects.

> You equate this: "Having a photo or drawing does not hurt anyone" to "child pornography does not hurt anyone".

This was admittedly poorly written, however I do not believe that possession of child pornography is a victimless crime either.

> Stallman has most likely been stopped and searched multiple times crossing borders. You'd think if he was a pedo he would've been caught by now

I am not saying he is a pedophile but that doesn't make what he said any less bizarre.

[magicalhippo]

It's not poor reading comprehension. It's poor writing at best.

"Having a photo or drawing does not hurt anyone" is factually wrong.

[drenvuk]

Would you care to expand on that? Right now I disagree.

[magicalhippo]

You can read my other post[1] where I provide some examples.

My examples were porn-related since that's the topic of RMS' post. But they don't need to be.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26722248