[Noisebridge-discuss] Fwd: Re: [tor-talk] Statement by a group of women regarding *Appelbaum*

Alex Merlin Glowaski alex.glowaski at gmail.com
Sun Jun 12 01:27:11 UTC 2016

The funny thing is: if it's a single allegation, the victim is discredited.
"But everyone else thinks he's a great guy!"
Yet when multiple accusers come forward with similar stories and
corroboration, as often happens once one person speaks out (see: Cosby),
then it's a "lynch mob."

Years ago, I was warned about this person from a trusted friend in the
community, who knows him, specifically citing sexually exploitative
behavior. A classic missing stair.

Noisebridge is not a court of law, and not dependent upon the US's legal
"due process" system – a system that is deeply flawed when it comes to
issues of sexual assault. For a glimpse into Noisebridge's actual
established process for related incidents (albeit those that take place
within the space), check out the anti-harassment policy.

On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Andrey Fedorov <me at anfedorov.com> wrote:

> Obviously not, and please don't try to re-interpret my words as absurd, as
> that is not constructive
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity>.
> Let me try again: I am looking for verified accounts of Jacob's behavior
> and a chain of reasoning which justifies a ban from the space. I'm not
> defending Jacob's alleged behavior as universally culturally acceptable,
> just asking for some semblance of due process, because without it, you have mob
> justice <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g>. For example,
> Alison Macrina seems to have substantiated that Jacob was once rudely
> forward in a proposition during dinner, and then made an inappropriate joke
> about 9/11. For most employee-level corporate cultures, this is wholly
> unacceptable and HR would start building a case to fire him. At an dinner
> with one friend I'm thinking of, he'd get quickly put in his place with the
> coldest "that's not appropriate" imaginable. With another friend, he might
> get eye rolls and a flirtatious "someone's feeling confident!" or something
> similar.
> I don't know which agencies would be involved in targeting dissenters /
> leakers today and I don't wish to hypothesize about their methods, but when
> people start conflating "he's rude and inappropriate and pushy" and "he's
> clearly a rapist, ban him!", it perks up my "what's going on here?" sense.
> Once more, *due process requires evidence and reasoning and time for
> people to review the evidence and ponder the reasoning*.
> Think of it this way: on one end, there is the perfect trial and on the
> other is the Salem witch trials. Let's move this discussion a bit towards
> the former.
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 3:22 PM, John Shutt <john.d.shutt at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> This line of reasoning posits that an unbelievable number of people in
>> the infosec community — including Alison Macrina, Andrea Shepard, Shari
>> Steele, Micah Lee, Bill Buddington, Yan Zhu, Karen Reilly, Leigh Honeywell,
>> and Nick Farr, and that’s just off the top of my head in the past thirty
>> seconds — are liars or dupes for unspecified intelligence agencies, which
>> have decided to target Jacob Appelbaum in particular above all other
>> privacy advocates for reasons unknown, and that the numerous friends and
>> acquaintances of Appelbaum who see the accusations as matching up with
>> patterns of behavior they have personally witnessed are also confused or
>> lying.
>> On Jun 11, 2016, at 2:23 PM, Andrey Fedorov <me at anfedorov.com> wrote:
>> There is nothing to assume: a first hand account is more reliable than a
>> third-hand interpretation of what happened between them, and her own words
>> conclude in a way significantly more opinionated
>> <http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sop8ps> than the tone of the article
>> Ceci linked. The mental state of those gossiping about things they didn't
>> understand is (a) not very flattering, (b) unknowable, and (c) completely
>> beside the point.
>> hackers ain't got time for this shit.
>> Jacob leaks and publicizes classified information for a living. His
>> professional adversaries are intelligence agencies who have not just time,
>> but very large budgets and departments dedicated to "this shit".
>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> OK.  Let's assume Jill's refutation of the interpretation of the
>>> witnesses is the true story -- that she was upset for her own reasons, not
>>> because of Jake.
>>> Here's what we're left with -- that 3 people felt deeply concerned for
>>> an upset-seeming woman's well-being who was under Jake's spotlight, when
>>> Occam's Razor would normally have produced reasoning that chalked up her
>>> upset-ness to something more mundane.
>>> So then you can reason two ways about the mental state of the 3
>>> witnesses.  Either:
>>> 1) they have, each of them, absorbed enough data in observing Jacob's
>>> behaviors that their internal pattern-matchers were setting off warning
>>> alarms, and they were willing to risk social awkwardness (and potential
>>> backlash!) to save this woman a lot of trouble;
>>> or
>>> 2) they were participating in a conspiracy to take down a public figure.
>>> Here's why I'm not apt to believe #2: hackers ain't got time for this
>>> shit.
>>> --Naomi
>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Cecilia Tanaka <
>>> cecilia.tanaka at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Sorry, I can't resist more!  It's stronger than me!  :)
>>>> Did you all read this statement?  :)
>>>> Jill Bahring: I Was Not Assaulted by Jacob Appelbaum
>>>> http://gizmodo.com/jill-bahring-i-was-not-assaulted-by-jacob-appelbaum-1781684838
>>>> Quoting 'Mirimir', a voluntary collaborator of Tor Project:
>>>> "I'd say that conspiracies among Tor Project employees and volunteers
>>>> to force out and humiliate a key employee would be a serious matter, with
>>>> obvious impact on Tor development.  So it's not just Jacob's behavior that
>>>> must be reviewed.  It's also the behavior of the lynch mob.  And anyone who
>>>> behaved dishonestly and/or recklessly in this matter needs to resign.
>>>> There's no place in Tor Project for rapists.  But there's also no place
>>>> there for lynch mobs."
>>>> Tender kisses!  Sorry for my bad English!  :*
>>>> Ceci
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: "Cecilia Tanaka" <cecilia.tanaka at gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Jun 11, 2016 3:01 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Statement by a group of women regarding
>>>> *Appelbaum*
>>>> To: <tor-talk at lists.torproject.org>
>>>> Oh, it is so lovely!  The world is really small, as I said times
>>>> before!  <3
>>>> Joana Varon  (not Veron)  is a lovely friend of mine and we both work
>>>> voluntarily in different groups for *women's empowerment* using technology
>>>> in general.
>>>> I am a bad lawyer and tell lots of bad jokes, but Joana is a famous
>>>> researcher, famous for her intelligence and her work in the privacy area.
>>>> I didn't know about this statement, because I am being harassed for
>>>> several "friends" of mine and, just in case, I avoiding contact with
>>>> everybody.  :P
>>>> Now, my day is much more beautiful and I think I love her even more,
>>>> haha!!  ;)
>>>> I bcc her in this message and  -  wow!  -  Jo, I do love you!  Thank
>>>> you for being so fair and rational in all the moments.  You are an awesome
>>>> professional and a gorgeous person.  Thank you for being, my dear!  :*
>>>> Have a lovely weekend, shiny happy people!  <3
>>>> Cecilia, la la la...  Yep, always "cecilying", Jo!  :D
>>>> On Jun 11, 2016 2:26 PM, "carlo von lynX" <lynX at time.to.get.psyced.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Saturday 11th June 2016
>>>>> We, the undersigned, are a group of women who have been friends,
>>>>> colleagues, co-workers or partners of Jacob "Jake" Appelbaum over many
>>>>> years.
>>>>> We have decided that we must speak out due to the nature of this
>>>>> coordinated and one-sided attack on his character and work. It has become
>>>>> clear the mainstream media are unwilling to fact-check, and only too
>>>>> willing to persist in spreading uncorroborated and unfalsifiable rumor.
>>>>> This statement is to give our positive experiences with Jake from our
>>>>> first-hand, long-term perspectives, over many public and private situations.
>>>>> We do not claim to know what happened in precise situations that we
>>>>> were not present for, and we do not want to trivialise and minimise any
>>>>> pain that may have been caused. But we are observing – beyond the
>>>>> allegations, that are not for us to comment on specifically – an egregious
>>>>> character assassination is being played out with numerous defamations
>>>>> online and offline. This is not how the truth can be determined, or justice
>>>>> for anyone done, whether law enforcement is to be trusted or not.
>>>>> We would like to state that our experiences with Jake are different
>>>>> than what is often being portrayed. We know Jake to be a kind, loyal and
>>>>> dedicated person. We do understand Jake can be outspoken and provocative
>>>>> regarding a number of issues – which can come across as offensive –
>>>>> however, we have never found Jake to be as is being alleged.
>>>>> We are not apologists for any genuine wrongdoing, and as women working
>>>>> in this community we know that there are struggles around sexism. However,
>>>>> simple punitivism is not how the human rights that we all defend should be
>>>>> enforced or framed.
>>>>> We believe that an open and evidence-based discussion in this
>>>>> situation is necessary to allow our community to develop better processes
>>>>> to handle any allegations. Furiously targeting one person without allowing
>>>>> for proper fact analysis will never solve the bigger structural problem
>>>>> that has been highlighted. We should use this moment to grow and make
>>>>> things better, not destroy the movement and create divisions. We need to
>>>>> create a channel for discussions on how to make things better.
>>>>> We stand in solidarity with Jake against the way this is being handled
>>>>> and on the side of justice for all, in hope the truth on all sides will be
>>>>> able to come to light in a rational and constructive manner.
>>>>> Renata Avila, Human Rights Lawyer
>>>>> Susan Benn, Artist
>>>>> Cathleen Berger, Policy Advisor
>>>>> Geraldine de Bastion, Policy Expert
>>>>> Annegret Falter, Political Scientist
>>>>> Marie Gutbub, Journalist
>>>>> Sarah Harrison, Journalist
>>>>> Christy Lange, Writer
>>>>> Isik Mater, Infosec Specialist
>>>>> Angela Richter, Theatre Director
>>>>> Felicity Ruby, PhD Candidate
>>>>> Joana Veron, Lawyer
>>>>> The initial signatories to this statement (named above) have opened an
>>>>> email address to receive additional
>>>>> signatories as well as any other constructive comments.
>>>>> Email: dueprocess at riseup.net
>>>>> Key ID: 3D1CEF58
>>>>> Key Fingerprint: 2A1D 7685 7AF0 ADD5 F3E5 D5B0 748C FAE0 3D1C EF58
>>>>> https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2858953/Statement-Appelbaum-11-06.pdf
>>>>> https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2858953/Statement-Appelbaum-11-06.txt
>>>>> --
>>>>> tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk at lists.torproject.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
>>>>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>> --
>>> Naomi Theora Most
>>> naomi at nthmost.com
>>> +1-415-728-7490
>>> skype: nthmost
>>> http://twitter.com/nthmost
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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

yours truly ☆ alexglow.com
my fave hardware projects ☆ hackster.io/lists/alex
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20160611/63780cef/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list