[Noisebridge-discuss] Patrick being banned

Christie Dudley longobord at gmail.com
Thu Feb 24 00:47:29 UTC 2011


Hypotheticals here...

So what would happen if someone who was a Noisebridge regular got a
restraining order against another noisebridge regular.  How would the
community handle that?

If there's enough evidence for a restraining order for stalking, do we need
to make these women jump through the legal hoops to get one? If there's not,
how would we be able to arbitrate that as a community? Would we be willing
to enforce such an order as a community? Would we force women who managed to
get one to have to *call the police into the space* every time there became
an issue?

It's a question of community, and a rather important one. I've been in
communities where one member who was well liked got a restraining order
against another member who was well-liked, who beat up the first member.
(Does it matter that the two community members were married?)

It kind of tore the community in two. This can too, if you allow it to. Of
course, it probably helps that the subject in question is not particularly
well-liked, but that should not matter, should it?

Christie
_______
"The thing that is really hard, and really amazing, is giving up on being
perfect and beginning the work of becoming yourself."
--Anna Quindlen



On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Albert Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com>wrote:

> Jim, will you take my word for it? How about the word of the
> twenty-plus people you were at the meeting, who unanimously agreed on
> this course of action? How many people would it take to convince you
> that this required immediate action?
>
> Have you talked to anyone in person yet who is familiar with the
> specifics of the situation? Do you realize why we wouldn't want to
> publish the exact details of everything, not only for Patrick's
> privacy but for the women he's harassed as well?
>
> -Al
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 4:23 PM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:
> >
> >    i won't accept that. collectively you asked
> > essentially that we non-participants defer judgment.
> > okay, but come up with the basis for your decision
> > and action, and it had better be strong enough to
> > justify that you couldn't wait an extra week for
> > fuller discussion and consensus.
> >    and no, i won't just take your word for it.
> >
> > speaking only for myself.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 15:34 -0800, VonGuard wrote:
> >> Just one more thing here:
> >>
> >>
> >> Noisebridge is a place that should be safe. NO ONE should feel as
> >> though coming to Noisebridge endangers them. This si the core issue.
> >> Please accept that we all discussed this extensively and felt
> >> immediate action was necessary.
> >>
> >>
> >> Let me state that again, it was DECIDED THAT IMMEDIATE ACTION WAS
> >> NECESSARY.
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't want to speculate about what Patrick might or might not have
> >> done, but those of us at the meeting felt that it was time to do
> >> something, and so we did.
> >>
> >>
> >> It is entirely inappropriate to put a decision like that to committee
> >> and a week-long observation period. It was felt that Patrick was
> >> actively engaged in extremely unexcellent behavior that set off
> >> warning flags in all of our collective heads. As I said in a previous
> >> email, this was not about a dood being creepy, this was about an
> >> active role he was taking in pursuing women who has expressed to him
> >> the fact that his attentions were unwelcome.
> >>
> >>
> >> Immediate action was called for. I am not saying Patrick would have
> >> raped someone, but I am saying that I FUCKING WELL WAS NOT GONNA LET
> >> THAT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF OR AT NOISEBRIDGE. OK? Fuck committees and
> >> discussion. If yer butt-hurt, I am sorry. Blame me. I will rest easy
> >> tonight knowing my female friends are now safe at the space. If that
> >> safety comes at the cost of respect people have for me, or the
> >> decisions we made last night, so be it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Noisebridge must be a safe place. Many people at Noisebridge have
> >> crossed boundaries like this in the past, but talking it out has
> >> always resolved the situation. In this case, it did not and his
> >> behavior was not corrected.
> >>
> >>
> >> Please, stop this thread, wait until next week. This is absolutely not
> >> something we'll be doing on a whim, or because we all feel like
> >> castigating someone. This was done to protect our female members, whom
> >> Patrick was making feel not just uncomfortable, but unsafe.
> >>
> >>
> >> Come next week. I guarantee that after you see the evidence and talk
> >> to us, you too will agree with all of us.
> >>
> >>
> >> Noisebridge is a do-ocracy. When I see someone threatening another
> >> members' safety, I'm gonna make that stop, and I'm going to do it
> >> without fucking consensus. Somethings have to happen, and they have to
> >> happen right fucking now.
> >>
> >>
> >> I am sorry for the harsh tone here, but society at large often allows
> >> claims of stalking to fall on deaf ears, and I am not gonna let
> >> Noisebridge ignore REPEATED claims of his abuse. I absolutely deplore
> >> men who make women feel unsafe in an attempt to manipulate them into
> >> bed. It is disgusting, and it happens all the time. So, kindly, with
> >> respect, will all the men on this thread shut the fuck up and trust
> >> we're doing the right thing? You, very likely, do not understand the
> >> scope of this problem, and your continued requests to change our
> >> actions are insulting to the women who were brave enough to let us
> >> know about these problems.
> >>
> >>
> >> And, finally, if and when there is someone at Noisebridge who's very
> >> presence negates the ability of multiple others to be at the space, I
> >> say that person has to go. If we didn't ban Patrick, we were banning
> >> multiple ladies who would never have come back. And as we keep
> >> pointing out, never is a long time.
> >>
> >>
> >> If you feel sorry for Patrick, contact him offlist and open your own
> >> therapy service. Noisebridge is about hacking, not about fixing
> >> completely broken people.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Jason Dusek <jason.dusek at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>         On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 22:01, Frantisek Apfelbeck
> >>         <algoldor at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>         > If Patric is being banned it should not be "for ever".
> >>         Things
> >>         > change and people does too.
> >>
> >>
> >>          "does" -> "do"
> >>          "for ever" -> "forever"
> >>
> >>          I agree. A saying I like, from the founder of Aikido:
> >>
> >>            True budo is the loving protection of all beings with a
> >>            spirit of reconciliation.
> >>
> >>          I think we all would prefer it if Patrick were to choose to
> >>          reconcile, offering apologies and mending his ways. To
> >>          participate in this reconciliation would gladden our hearts
> >>          and we must not close ourselves to that (although we needn't
> >>          hold out much hope for it, either).
> >>
> >>          I asked for the wording "until further notice" or
> >>          "indefinitely". Forever is a long time.
> >>
> >>         --
> >>         Jason Dusek
> >>         Linux User #510144 | http://counter.li.org/
> >>         _______________________________________________
> >>
> >>
> >>         Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> >>         Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> >>
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> >> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20110223/68e15f7e/attachment.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list