[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Statement on Jacob Appelbaum

VonGuard vonguard at gmail.com
Mon Jun 13 17:45:26 UTC 2016


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
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20160613/eb90f161/attachment.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list