[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Statement on Jacob Appelbaum

Mon Jun 13 19:50:57 UTC 2016

forever thank you Quinn
when Snowden Docs Show British Spies Used Sex and 'Dirty Tricks'
<http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/edward-snowden-interview/exclusive-snowden-docs-show-british-spies-used-sex-dirty-tricks-n23091>to
target enemies of the state with honeypots, it is extremely helpful to see
a responsible account of the culpable facts in matters of this gravity when
an issue such as this is discussed in a public manner
<http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/edward-snowden-interview/exclusive-snowden-docs-show-british-spies-used-sex-dirty-tricks-n23091>

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Quinn Norton <quinn at quinnnorton.com>
wrote:

> He's been publicly accused of sexual misconduct by his employer and
> dismissed in accordance with US labor law, accused of abusive harassment by
> nick farr, Nadim, myself, and others who have given eye witness details and
> put our names on it. He's been accused of work stealing by so many people
> over the years I've lost count, but most publicly theft of Len's work
> before he committed suicide, by len's wife, meredith -- which he then
> *admitted* to on Twitter years ago. He's been disowned by several orgs he's
> been affiliated with, including freedom of the press foundation recently.
> I'm pretty sure the main thing making noisebridge look bad is this mailing
> list thread.
>
> Meticulously tapped out with my index fingrr.
>
> On 14 Jun 2016, at 4:14 AM, Andrey Fedorov <me at anfedorov.com> wrote:
>
> Wow, that got out of hand fast. Views "from the outside" are actually very
> important here, precisely because emotion is clearly trumping reason (e.g.
> in VonGuard's posts). Whether genuine or a cheap rhetorical tactic, it
> isn't helping anyone towards the truth of the matter.
>
> Aside from an uncorroborated anonymous account submitted to that site, has
> anyone actually accused Jacob of raping them? Forest's account seems to me
> a genuine description of Jacob as not exactly a boy scout, but showing
> healthy shame and being apologetic when confronted about transgressions.
> This is not the person described in some of the more harrowing accounts.
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:06 AM, VonGuard <vonguard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry to unload on just you, but really, I was upset at the whole
>> thread.
>>
>> Sexual assault and misconduct accusations should be handled in private.
>> The MOMENT people start demanding a rape victim be open with the public
>> about the rape is the moment rape victims are silenced.
>>
>> I get it. Nerds want to be even handed, just, and never want to exclude
>> people.
>>
>> Unfortunately, this instinct FREQUENTLY results in one person being
>> allowed to repeatedly offend and drive others away. Others who are too
>> afraid to write anonymous testimonials.
>>
>> So, for everyone else who has issues with this: contact the board and ask
>> them the questions. This is not a subject for open debate. If you want to
>> come in on the list and say "Hey, did you think this through?" Just stop.
>> It's not appropriate. Your drive-by ethics check is not needed, and only
>> serves to add more voices to the already deafening chorus of people now
>> thinking Jacob is the victim.
>>
>> How fucked up is that? People who are, literally, braver than Noisebridge
>> has been in the past, coming forward to stop this repeated abuse, and the
>> first thing that happens is they are seen as the attackers, and Jacob, the
>> victim.
>>
>> Yeah, the site they built is ham-fisted, but please, don't add to the
>> chorus of people painting Jacob as the victim here. Jacob specializes in
>> living in the gray area where his victims are made to seem unstable and
>> unreliable, and he thrives on that fact.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:01 AM, robb <sf99er at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> thx Lesley, that's exactly what i was looking for.
>>>
>>> my original comment was based on what i gleaned from this/these
>>> thread(s).
>>>
>>> i have been the victim of false accusations (theft) by a mob of people i
>>> thought were my comrades who brought only the conclusion that i stole $ w/o
>>> any evidence or facts.
>>> it is very damaging as one can't defend oneself against mere
>>> conclusions. i apologize if my bad experience has made me hyperobjective. i
>>> guess it still affects me.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:45 AM, VonGuard <vonguard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Your response is, in fact, victim shaming. You come in and IMMEDIATELY
>>>> assume they're lying, and ask for an anonymous account of what happened.
>>>> There are a lot out there already, so I can ONLY assume you want more.
>>>>
>>>> Victim shaming isn't about telling someone they're lying to their face.
>>>> It's about coming to the group and saying "Everyone sure in here?" like
>>>> some kinda fucked up dad checking in on the uncle molesting children in the
>>>> basement. "You sure he was molesting you? Let's sit down and have you write
>>>> an essay about how he molested you because you're a child and I cannot take
>>>> your word for it."
>>>>
>>>> So, yeah, coming around and saying "I want a statement, I want proof, I
>>>> want to know exactly how he raped this person" is, in fact, victim shaming.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you didn't know this. Seems few people do.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:23 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
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/ff8af6a8/attachment-0003.html>