[Noisebridge-discuss] Patrick being banned

Wed Feb 23 21:04:31 UTC 2011

what are the normal procedures for this?

--S

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 1:03 PM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:

>
> you didn't follow the normal procedures; you took action
> extraordinarily. by definition that's in the neighborhood
> of vigilante action. note that so is putting out a fire.
>
>
> On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 12:53 -0800, Albert Sweigart wrote:
> > I'd just like to say that last night's meeting was one of the most
> > well attended meetings I've seen in quite a while. And I have never
> > seen such a diverse and large group of Noisebridge members agree on
> > something so consistently. Your idea that this is *anywhere* close to
> > "vigilante action" is incorrect.
> >
> > -Al
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 12:43 PM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >    i wasn't there and i'm sure lots of other members
> > > and regular participants weren't there. i worry that
> > > this has been a little too close to vigilante action
> > > for my comfort.
> > >    rachel's initial email somewhat addressed this
> > > discomfort in asking that those of us who were not
> > > there trust the action at least until we see the
> > > "evidence", i.e. basis for this drastic action. okay,
> > > i'll suspend my alarm for a little bit, but the burden
> > > is on you all who took the action.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 10:02 -0800, Albert Sweigart wrote:
> > >> I would also like note that this was discuss for a couple hours last
> > >> night at the weekly meeting. Lots of people from all over the spectrum
> > >> of "what Noisebridge ought to be" were there, and EVERY SINGLE PERSON
> > >> supported barring Patrick from coming back to the space.
> > >>
> > >> In Patrick-style bullet points:
> > >>
> > >> * This isn't about his personality quirks or obnoxious mailing list
> > >> posts, it's about him sexually harassing people.
> > >> * He's harassed multiple people.
> > >> * He refuses to talk with others about it, change his behavior, or
> > >> even admit that he's done anything wrong or apologize.
> > >> * It's to the point where multiple women feel uncomfortable enough
> > >> that they would avoid Noisebridge if Patrick could still come.
> > >> * This is exactly the situation that calls for banning from ever
> > >> physically entering the space again.
> > >>
> > >> Also, he's stolen our printer. He clearly said he donated it (
> > >>
> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2011-February/020804.html
> > >> ) but took it back this morning when he was told he couldn't come back
> > >> into the space.
> > >>
> > >> -Al
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:26 AM, rachel lyra hospodar
> > >> <rachel at mediumreality.com> wrote:
> > >> > hooray!  well-put, VonGuard.  I will chime in to say that while
> people
> > >> > must trust that our doocratic decision was made in good faith, we
> did
> > >> > not yet consense on banning patrick because of how our consensus
> process
> > >> > works - everyone will have a chance to view the evidence and decide
> for
> > >> > themselves.
> > >> >
> > >> > There is evidence.  This is not a witch hunt.
> > >> >
> > >> > We are viscerally and hugely concerned for the safety and well-being
> of
> > >> > the vast majority of our users, and feel that this negative person's
> > >> > behavior has passed beyond something that we can influence and/or
> help
> > >> > to improve.
> > >> >
> > >> > Noisebridge exists to provide a safe space to hack, not as a place
> to
> > >> > help those who behave reprehensibly to improve themselves.  We
> aren't
> > >> > banning him from humanity, just our workshop.
> > >> >
> > >> > R.
> > >> >
> > >> > On 2/23/2011 9:04 AM, VonGuard wrote:
> > >> >> So, I just wanted to nip this in the bud: We are all very
> appreciative of
> > >> >> advice from newcomers, but if you are watching all this Patrick
> Keys drama
> > >> >> from the outside, and you think to yourself "Hey, that's some very
> > >> >> unexcellent behavior towards Patrick!" I ask you to stop and think
> for a
> > >> >> moment.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Noisebridge is a super accepting space. It was only after
> tremendous
> > >> >> discussion, debate, and evidence gathering that we decided to ban
> him. Until
> > >> >> the next official meeting, most of you are just going to have to
> trust that
> > >> >> we have made the best decision for Noisebridge here. That is why so
> many
> > >> >> names were appended to the bottom of that email. This was to say
> "We are
> > >> >> signing to say this is legitimate, and that this action needs to be
> taken."
> > >> >>
> > >> >> This was actually never about personality, or even about the
> mailing list.
> > >> >> This was about Patrick making women at Noisebridge feel unsafe.
> This was not
> > >> >> done based on any form of speculation or jumping to conclusions.
> This was
> > >> >> done after a careful, considered process where it was decided that
> not
> > >> >> banning Patrick was the same thing as banning a number of women who
> would no
> > >> >> longer come to Noisebridge because of his presence and his unwanted
> > >> >> attentions, and his stalking behavior.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Noisebridge has plenty of socially awkward geeks. We all know that
> if yer a
> > >> >> chick at Noisebridge, someone might stare at your boobs. Awkward
> though this
> > >> >> is, it's actually OK. Sure, it's not the most polite thing to do,
> but it's
> > >> >> harmless. Women and men at Noisebridge are still perfectly free to
> behave
> > >> >> like women and men. This is very far from what is taking place
> here.
> > >> >> Patrick's behavior was well over the line of acceptable.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> This was not a witch hunt. This is not a precedent for banning
> annoying or
> > >> >> creepy people. This was about physical safety in and outside of the
> space
> > >> >> for ladies with whom Patrick had crossed the line, and continued to
> cross
> > >> >> the line after being told to stop.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Finally, I will say that the "intervention, mediated talking" route
> had
> > >> >> already been tried with Patrick. If you are interested in reading
> more about
> > >> >> Patrick's complete inability and unwillingness to listen to ANYONE
> about
> > >> >> ANYTHING, there are about 4 months worth of email backlogs in our
> archives
> > >> >> documenting his complete inability to listen and understand
> people's
> > >> >> problems with him. It's a pattern with him.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> This extended to also being unable to accept the word "no!" from
> women. And
> > >> >> that makes me want to do something truly terrible to him. But
> instead of
> > >> >> hurting him or assaulting him online or offline, we all decided to
> solve
> > >> >> this within Noisebridge's processes. Believe me, there are others
> here who
> > >> >> would have done far worse to him given the chance. The man is a
> menace, and
> > >> >> does not even treat women like people. They are sexual objects to
> him, ones
> > >> >> that owe him sexual attentions, in his eyes.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> This is not someone we will ever be allowing back. He is pure
> fucking scum,
> > >> >> and he is absolutely the antithesis of everything Noiserbridge
> stands for.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Let it be known: you cannot sexually harass or endanger ANYONE at
> > >> >> Noisebridge. You will be banned if you do so and do not correct the
> behavior
> > >> >> when you are told to stop. This is the precedent we're setting. And
> I think
> > >> >> it is a very good one. Everyone should be safe at Noisebridge. And
> no one
> > >> >> should feel unsafe outside of Noisebridge because a person
> associated with
> > >> >> the space is following/harassing them.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> If you are still not convinced, come to the meeting next week. I
> agree, this
> > >> >> is all quite ugly, but at the end of the day, this is 100%
> Patrick's own
> > >> >> fault. Noisebridge remains %99.999 inclusive. But stalkers will
> NEVER be
> > >> >> welcome.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Rikke Rasmussen <
> > >> >> rikke.c.rasmussen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> I know that my being very new at Noisebridge may cause some of you
> to find
> > >> >>> it inappropriate for me to interfere in this matter, but I hope
> you'll bear
> > >> >>> with me and hear me out. I've met Patrick multiple times through
> > >> >>> Tastebridge, and know him only as polite, if perhaps a little
>  formal, even
> > >> >>> stiff, at times. However, I have never found his behavior untoward
> in any
> > >> >>> way. I will of course read the material available tomorrow, but
> given the
> > >> >>> very rapid development of the situation, I feel like I should add
> a comment
> > >> >>> in his defense immediately - I've witnessed a lynching before and
> have no
> > >> >>> desire to see another.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Exclusion is the worst punishment  Noisebridge has because of the
> no
> > >> >>> policies-policy, our equivalent of capital punishment, and I do
> not feel
> > >> >>> that the crime merits this measure. It is as big a deal as the
> offended
> > >> >>> party chooses to make of it, but since this has only been brought
> out in
> > >> >>> public by a flamewar, and not by the person herself, I can't help
> but feel
> > >> >>> that Frantisek may have a point about attempting mediated dialogue
> first.
> > >> >>> More than anything, though, I would like to hear from the female
> in question
> > >> >>> - if you are following this discussion, I would like to know
> whether you
> > >> >>> feel that this is reasonable?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I hope it's clear that I'm trying to pour water, not gasoline, on
> the fire
> > >> >>> here.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> /Rikke
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> 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
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>

-- 
Shannon Lee
(503) 539-3700

"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20110223/02db3b25/attachment-0003.html>