[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Statement on Jacob Appelbaum

[Lesley Bell]

Lmgtfy... http://jacobappelbaum.net

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:24 AM robb <sf99er at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/c50cf75b/attachment-0003.html>