[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Statement on Jacob Appelbaum

[robb]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 8:45 AM, VonGuard <vonguard at gmail.com> wrote:

> Personally, I don't give a rats ass what this "looks like from the
> outside."
>
that's obvious

>
> If one more fucking person DEMANDS that the victims come forward with
> evidence and photos and videos and rape kits, I'm gonna blow my fucking
> stack.
>

i did not demand any physical evidence

>
> Demanding evidence is NOT what you do in these cases.  Instead, you
> quietly discuss, find the evidence and statements needed quietly, AND NOT
> IN PUBLIC, so as not to shame and humiliate the victims.
>

again, i did not demand physical evidence. i merely suggested an anonymous
account that demonstrates Jake's culpability.

>
> If you think Noisebridge did wrong, you don't trust Noisebridge. This
> decision was NOT made lightly, and as it CLEARLY states in the statement,
> Jake was a problem at Noisebridge BEFORE this began.
>

i don't think nb did *wrong *

>
> You want facts? You go get raped by him then come back here and listen to
> everyone tell you you're lying. Then try to cough up some "facts."
>

no comment

>
> This is an inherently messy situation, and you know what? Reminding us all
> of that fact and questioning the victims is NOT HELPING. We know.
> Noisebridge knows. Noisebridge has WAY more experience with Jake than most
> people. Either trust that Noisebridge did right, or find a hackerspace
> where Jake is allowed in the door, if it matters that much to you.
>

my concern for jake, personally, is nil. i do care about fairness & equity
alot though

>
> We're fucking done with him. Go plead his case and cast aspersions on the
> victims elsewhere.
>

you are seriously delusional if you think i'm pleading his case. my concern
is for nb. this is a public list. libel is a real.

>
> It makes me physically ill to see more people supporting Jake than the
> victims. I don't care how ham-fisted their reports sound. Assuming multiple
> ladies and men are lying and Noisebridge is just being reactionary is just
> ludicrous.
>

i am not supporting jake

>
> For all these accusations to be right ONLY ONE THING MUST BE TRUE: Jacob
> has to be a bad guy. Terrible to believe, I know.
>
>
> For all the accusations to be wrong, and for all these orgs to to toss
> Jacob out improperly, then everyone of the orgs and every one of Jacobs
> accusers has to be wrong.
>
clearly, i'm lacking some facts here

>
> Explain to me again how it makes sense to shame the victims and everyone
> else involved and run to the defense of a single, powerful individual
> accused of shaming victims and threatening them. Please explain to me how
> the one accused of making these victims feel afraid and ashamed needs your
> help, rather than the victims needing your help.
>

i'm not trying to defend anyone but nb.

>
> Please, continue discussing this on the email list and informing all of us
> at Noisebridge that we made a hasty decisions you don't like, assuming
> wee're all just reactionaries and making this shit up. Assume we don't know
> Jacob better than you. Please, continue to assume we don't have dozens of
> other cases where Jacob hurt members of the Noisebridge community in the
> past. Please assume we're just being vengeful.
>
> YOU are reactionary, evidenced by your response to my post


> Please, continue to victim shame.
>
nice conclusion...now where exactly in my post did i shame any victims?

again,
the allegations against jake are extremely serious accusations.
it is imperative to handle this matter responsibly for all the parties
involved - including nb & tor project.

i wish you all well

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 8:45 AM, VonGuard <vonguard at gmail.com> wrote:

> Personally, I don't give a rats ass what this "looks like from the
> outside."
>
> If one more fucking person DEMANDS that the victims come forward with
> evidence and photos and videos and rape kits, I'm gonna blow my fucking
> stack.
>
> Demanding evidence is NOT what you do in these cases.  Instead, you
> quietly discuss, find the evidence and statements needed quietly, AND NOT
> IN PUBLIC, so as not to shame and humiliate the victims.
>
> If you think Noisebridge did wrong, you don't trust Noisebridge. This
> decision was NOT made lightly, and as it CLEARLY states in the statement,
> Jake was a problem at Noisebridge BEFORE this began.
>
> You want facts? You go get raped by him then come back here and listen to
> everyone tell you you're lying. Then try to cough up some "facts."
>
> This is an inherently messy situation, and you know what? Reminding us all
> of that fact and questioning the victims is NOT HELPING. We know.
> Noisebridge knows. Noisebridge has WAY more experience with Jake than most
> people. Either trust that Noisebridge did right, or find a hackerspace
> where Jake is allowed in the door, if it matters that much to you.
>
> We're fucking done with him. Go plead his case and cast aspersions on the
> victims elsewhere.
>
> It makes me physically ill to see more people supporting Jake than the
> victims. I don't care how ham-fisted their reports sound. Assuming multiple
> ladies and men are lying and Noisebridge is just being reactionary is just
> ludicrous.
>
> For all these accusations to be right ONLY ONE THING MUST BE TRUE: Jacob
> has to be a bad guy. Terrible to believe, I know.
>
>
> For all the accusations to be wrong, and for all these orgs to to toss
> Jacob out improperly, then everyone of the orgs and every one of Jacobs
> accusers has to be wrong.
>
> Explain to me again how it makes sense to shame the victims and everyone
> else involved and run to the defense of a single, powerful individual
> accused of shaming victims and threatening them. Please explain to me how
> the one accused of making these victims feel afraid and ashamed needs your
> help, rather than the victims needing your help.
>
> Please, continue discussing this on the email list and informing all of us
> at Noisebridge that we made a hasty decisions you don't like, assuming
> wee're all just reactionaries and making this shit up. Assume we don't know
> Jacob better than you. Please, continue to assume we don't have dozens of
> other cases where Jacob hurt members of the Noisebridge community in the
> past. Please assume we're just being vengeful.
>
> Please, continue to victim shame.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 8:33 AM, robb <sf99er at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> fwiw, from the outside, this looks like a smear campaign.
>> perhaps an account of the facts - changing the names to protect the
>> innocent - could be posted somewhere.
>> repeated statements of conclusions w/o facts are not convincing & do more
>> to raise suspicions about an unaccountable process than they do about
>> Appelbaum's conduct.
>> the allegations against jake are extremely serious accusations.
>> it is imperative to handle this matter responsibly for all the parties
>> involved - including nb & tor project.
>> ~r
>> <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://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20160613/06bc274c/attachment-0003.html>