What situation is that exactly? Be specific.. the article was light on details and seemed like it was trying too hard to influence opinion based on feelings rather than facts.
From what I could tell these are literally political attacks taking things out of context. I saw one saying that Stallman said it was okay for people to pester for sex. Then I went and read what he said and no where did he say that.
The problem with attacking Stallman on a lie then saying "Yeah, but there was other legitimate stuff too" is that the initial misrepresentation demonstrates bad faith - which casts doubt on later insinuations.
If there is stuff that Stallman legitimately has to answer for, so be it, but in the context of kicking him while down, Gish-gallop style, this is pure justification after the fact.
