Any guidance is appreciated

https://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

“Atari”

emulation

So not Linux games then.

The important question is: why didn’t they engineer their system this way in the first place? Wouldn’t touch their products with a 10-foot barge poll.

you’re supposed to write a risk assessment

Risk assessments are trivially banal.

if I were running a site as a hobby I wouldn’t trust my own assessment

I’d trust mine. I have been trained to do them though. But having been trained, I can see how little is needed for them.

if it turns out you’re multi-risk then it looks like you need to be sure all sorts of measures are in place, some of which may require building capabilities that you don’t have yet

The measures that are required are the kind of things which now seem basic. Like having a means to flag posts as problematic. If I ran a forum that didn’t have such functionality, I’d be concerned regardless and probably take advantage of the kick up the arse.

I don’t blame anyone for deciding it’s not worth it.

Well that’s the question isn’t it. Is any particular forum worth bothering with. Clearly the cycling forum that’s shutting down isn’t. But I question whether that’s due to the new legislation.

This seems like an over reaction. I looked through the OFCOM overviews and I can’t see any reason why a small forum would need to shut down, they just need to do a little work to make sure they’re complying. No money needs to be involved from what I can tell.

It’s a reimplementation from scratch

It can’t be both a port and a reimplementation from scratch, those two concepts are mutually exclusive.

the game is FOSS

How can this be FOSS, or for that matter even legal, if Super Mario Bros is a proprietary game?

Linux, the kernel so associated with Free Software, was at some point proprietary.

ROFL what an ignorant fool

Free, open-source Photoshop alternative

Groan

Who is yalls go to

O_o

You are free to show me exactly where it criticizes the FSF beyond their interactions with stallman.

I’m glad we agree that DeVault’s Stallman Report attacks the FSF.

I don’t view pointing out that Stallman is not fit for a position of leadership to be an “attack” on the FSF or the free software community.

OP didn’t say which of the many attacks in the report they were referring to, they just said the report was “an attack”. I’ve no idea why you believe OP was referring to DeVault’s claim that Stallman is not fit for a position of leadership. That doesn’t make any sense. If one were being uncharitable, one might even say it was… irrational.

Edit: corrected quote, clarified wording

TLDR: Drew DeVault may be viewing Loli images.

Do you consider viewing Loli images to be OK? Where do you stand on that subculture?

Stallman is not the FSF.

FYI, DeVault’s Stallman Report explicitly attacks the FSF as well as Stallman.

The FSF is not the free software community

OP said that the report was “an attack on the FSF and the free software community in general” which doesn’t imply that the FSF is the free software community and in fact is explicitly distinguishing the two. I took it mean that the report was such a deceitful and irrational work, presented in such a duplicitous manner as to constitute an attack on the senses of the community.

Edit: in fact, the report does attack the community, even if justification for the attack is invalid:

“The case against Stallman is clear, and yet the free software community has failed to act …” – https://stallman-report.org/#why-publish-this-report

Awesome :-) DeVault gets his just desserts.

X Window

Begrudging respect for correct name

the report makes it obvious what objectionable statements were made

I disagree. The report claims there are disagreeable statements but when you actually look at the quotes of what Stallman said, they don’t match the claims or conclusions of the report.

This is why I’m asking if you can actually quote something Stallman said.

I believe you’re arguing in bad faith

I don’t think you’ve actually read the report.

From what? I’m not sure what in the report you think needs apologising for. Did you actually read the report? Is there a sentence you can quote and say “he needs to apologise for this”?

recants and / or apologizes

Just curious what, precisely, you would expect him to recant or apologise for?

done more to advance open source software

Just FYI, penned by Stallman himself no less: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html