> instead try to denigrate the goals of this initiative because of the chosen character

Incorrect. Nobody is denigrating the goals of the initiative. All criticism I see is directed at the choice of the mascot only.

You know... people can love an initiative and criticize its mascot at the same time. The two are not incompatible.

> Clippy would have been evil but that's the point, it wasn't back then.

I was around when Clippy was introduced. It was universally hated. If anything, Clippy would be a good mascot for intrusive AI tools and services that harvest our data without regard for our privacy, not least because Clippy constantly monitored user actions just so that it could interrupt them.

If we want a mascot for tools that respect our data, it should definitely be something far less evil than Clippy.

> Incorrect. Nobody is denigrating the goals of the initiative. All criticism I see is directed at the choice of the mascot only.

The top comment, a thread you participated in, claims "The entire forced clippy movement is incredibly poorly thought out" after criticism of using clippy as a mascot.