[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Statement on Jacob Appelbaum

robb sf99er at gmail.com
Mon Jun 13 18:01:07 UTC 2016


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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20160613/ada21a92/attachment.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list