[Noisebridge-discuss] It has come to my attention that...

Andrew Byrne andrew at pachakutech.com
Wed Jun 26 23:55:51 UTC 2013

Though uncertain of the phrase "have the run of the place", I volunteered
to abandon those projects per Rachel's suggestion at the meeting last night
and agree to her stronger impression, save Tuesday NB meetings; no one had
mentioned this matter to me before her, but the intrinsic confounds of a
strongly involved community member battling libel had already weighed on my
mind. Similarly, no-one has asked me to cease on this list for reasons
other than my own benefit until now. I would like to point out that I had
decided to take Rachel's advice as fatwa well before learning the standard
procedure, request this be handled in a timely matter, hope that my absence
from this discussion will not occasion public slagging, and bid you all
farewell 'till this is cleaned up.

On Jun 26, 2013 3:02 PM, "Alexandra Glowaski" <alex.glowaski at gmail.com>

> It's standard procedure to ask people to stay away from the space until a
> potential social issue has been resolved, through mediation or other means.
> Quite aside from any potential disputes, bypassing this process reflects
> poorly on someone's ability to respect others' boundaries. This makes me
> uncomfortable. If you didn't know earlier, no foul in my book, but please
> take note.
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Andrew Byrne <andrew at pachakutech.com>wrote:
>> My apologies if I offended you through that missive; I forgot that we
>> work out our problems on the public email list and was merely asking for
>> your fatwa, which you gave, thanks. -dru
>>  On Jun 26, 2013 1:50 PM, "rachel lyra hospodar" <rachelyra at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I am forwarding dru's private response to me to this list, as I have no
>>> interest in engaging in private discussion with him. I will, as per usual,
>>> install some filters on my inbox so that any private emails he sends are
>>> shunted to the same folder as nb-discuss, allowing me to experience them as
>>> part of that more public space.
>>> To be perfectly clear, it is my opinion that accused sexual offenders,
>>> especially ones who are involved in a NB mediation process, should stay
>>> completely away from the space until matters are resolved.
>>> To be painfully, explicitly clear, I believe Dru should stay completely
>>> away from the space until matters are resolved.
>>> Anyone who would like to come forward with an account of dru's behavior
>>> but would like to remain anonymous, please feel free to contact me.
>>> R.
>>> On Jun 26, 2013 12:59 AM, "Andrew Byrne" <andrew at pachakutech.com> wrote:
>>>> After thinking on your comment, I am prepared to abandon two out of the
>>>> four appointments that I have at Noisebridge: The android developers
>>>> support group that I teach and the docent/redshirt shift, both on Saturday.
>>>> I think that my continued presence at the Nb rebase meeting, Tue at 6 and
>>>> the post waste nexus meeting, mon at 7 is within the spirit of your letter.
>>>> Correct?
>>>> -dru
>>>> On Jun 25, 2013 1:19 PM, "rachel lyra hospodar" <rachelyra at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> After reading through Carl's email I would like to add that further
>>>>> witnesses/subjects of harassment who wish to remain anonymous may do so,
>>>>> while still coming forward and submitting testimony. In previous incidents,
>>>>> we've followed various procedures WRT this testimony (ie just anonymyzing,
>>>>> or anonymizing with only paper versions available to further protect, if
>>>>> requested).
>>>>> I would like to emphasize that this is possible here. History shows us
>>>>> that overwhelmingly often, the victims of sexual harrassment are subjected
>>>>> to social abuse and scorn when they come forward. (This is an example of
>>>>> rape culture)
>>>>> Additionally, I will add that our historical pattern has been to ask
>>>>> the accused offender to stay away until the matter is dealt with. I believe
>>>>> this is a good precedent, and I hope if anyone sees Dru in the space they
>>>>> post about it here. A good way for Dru to show good faith and demonstrate
>>>>> cooperativity here would be to, well, do so, by agreeing that accused
>>>>> sexual offenders, while they should be treated fairly, shouldn't have the
>>>>> run of the place.
>>>>> R.
>>>>>  On Jun 24, 2013 11:17 PM, "Liz Henry" <lizhenry at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Sounds reasonable Carl.  I think it is not so much "to decide Dru's
>>>>>> fate" but, to decide whether we want to hang out with him and basically
>>>>>> welcome him.
>>>>>> I think the idea of Dru remaining away from the space until he can
>>>>>> come to a meeting where  this is discussed is a good one.
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> Liz
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Carl <carl at icarp.info> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> Lillian, and others involved...
>>>>>>> I apologize for not getting on this mediation sooner.  I've been ill
>>>>>>> this past week.  It would be helpful if others would also like to step up
>>>>>>> to help.  (so far Liz and Kevin have stepped up)
>>>>>>> Perhaps "mediation" isn't the correct term to use, how about "task
>>>>>>> force", "committee", or "investigation".  Anyhow, we use the term
>>>>>>> "mediation" because that is the process that Noisebridge has set up for
>>>>>>> issues like these.  We even have a wiki page set up for it:
>>>>>>> https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Mediation
>>>>>>> On that page it suggests that in order for a problem to brought up
>>>>>>> at a group meeting, someone must step forward to act as an "advocate" for
>>>>>>> the individual.  All parties involved should have advocates when an issue
>>>>>>> is brought up at a weekly meeting.
>>>>>>> The reason that nothing has been done so far, prior to Lillian's
>>>>>>> posting on the mailing list last week, is that:
>>>>>>> 1.  No one has been actively advocating on Lillian's behalf,
>>>>>>> although Liz did bring up the issue at a meeting.  I hope that someone will
>>>>>>> stand up to advocate on her behalf (if not Liz).
>>>>>>> 2.  There wasn't sufficient information presented for the membership
>>>>>>> to make any decision on banning.  Basically, all we knew was that some
>>>>>>> person, who wished to remain anonymous, was accusing Dru of sexual
>>>>>>> harassment, while no description of what occurred was presented, and no
>>>>>>> other witness accounts came forth.  It shouldn't be any surprise that this
>>>>>>> was insufficient for a motion to ban someone.
>>>>>>> Since Lillian came forth with her account of events, we have more
>>>>>>> detailed info to act upon.
>>>>>>> The recent revelation of emails between Dru and Dante may also help
>>>>>>> shed light on the case.
>>>>>>> Dru denies any wrongdoing.
>>>>>>> We can't just automatically ban Dru without some sort of due
>>>>>>> process, at least not permanently, as Lillian suggest.  What we can do is
>>>>>>> temporarily ban Dru while this investigation takes place.  This may be a
>>>>>>> course of action we can take to be brought up at the next meeting.
>>>>>>> The next steps then are as follows:
>>>>>>> - Fact finding.  Obtain any other relevant evidence and witness
>>>>>>> accounts.  I would highly encourage others to come forth to tell us what
>>>>>>> you know.  If you wish to remain anonymous, you may contact either myself
>>>>>>> or Liz, for the time being, and we will respect your wishes.
>>>>>>> - Since Noisebridge is taking upon itself to act as a "court" to
>>>>>>> decide Dru's fate, we should establish some procedures to handle this.
>>>>>>>  Each party must have an advocate.  Evidence is to be presented.  A jury
>>>>>>> weighs the evidence and makes a judgement.  Typically the jury is simply
>>>>>>> the membership present at a Tuesday night meeting.
>>>>>>> - If it is decided that Dru did wrong based on the evidence
>>>>>>> presented, or that it be decided that he is likely to cause harm in the
>>>>>>> future, then the jury would also consense on a course of action that Dru
>>>>>>> must follow.  This may be a permanent ban.  It may be something else, such
>>>>>>> as require him to take a course on "sexual harassment sensitivity", which
>>>>>>> some workplaces require -- I don't know.
>>>>>>> - This is assuming he is found guilty.  Some may not be convinced
>>>>>>> that he is.  That is why we need to collect evidence and go through this
>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>> - Dru says that he is wrongly accused.  He at least deserves to
>>>>>>> present a defense, since it's his reputation on the line.
>>>>>>> Some evidence that I would like to find out more about:
>>>>>>> - Lillian says "others who still use the space have expressed to me
>>>>>>> that they don't feel safe around Andrew either." - We would like to hear
>>>>>>> this testimony.
>>>>>>> - I still haven't talked with Dante about his experience and the
>>>>>>> emails.
>>>>>>> - Any other witnesses.  We need you to come forward.
>>>>>>> I think Noisebridge is very much concerned about safety in our
>>>>>>> space, and we certainly would like to avoid scaring people off from coming
>>>>>>> here, as well as our reputation.  Issues like these are never pleasant to
>>>>>>> deal with, but we do because as in any community these issues do come up.
>>>>>>>  It's good that we're out in the open about it, even though it risks
>>>>>>> alienating people from visiting our space, I think it's overall better this
>>>>>>> way.  It's like open-source software vs. closed-source:  We risk showing
>>>>>>> the world all our bugs, but at least they're more likely to be fixed, vs.
>>>>>>> hiding our bugs and not fixing them.  I think the alternative would be a
>>>>>>> space that isn't as safe.
>>>>>>> cheers
>>>>>>> -Carl
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
>>>>>> Liz Henry
>>>>>> lhenry at mozilla.com
>>>>>> lizhenry at gmail.com
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
> --
> Make your world! • http://alexglow.com
> I welcome VSRE emails. • http://vsre.info/
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130626/4e0a5aed/attachment.html>

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list