Nick Farr's 30c3 Jake Appelbaum story of abuse and harassment

Why do you think the police would do anything?

We know from the victims of stalkers that the police don't see it as important; they don't care; or if they do care there's not much they can do.

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/apr/16/lily-allen-sta...

Seven years!

I wish people wouldn't use JA as an abbreviation here; ambiguous with Julian Assange due to overlap.

I guess I didn't make this clear enough in the post, but I had no intention of letting the talk go forward unless the presenter could bring up some really solid evidence of some sort. Slides, some kind of visual element or documentation were required to earn/keep your LT slot and, for understandable reasons, some people wait until the last minute to submit the final draft of those.

To be crass, I threw this person on the schedule and gave them a deadline with every intention of removing them the next day to shut them up so I could go to sleep. The LT schedules change up to and during the event itself and I've rejected a lot of talks once it was clear that the slides or revisions contained inappropriate material.

The goal of the event is to give everyone a chance to take the stage, the point is to not curate beyond clustering similar topics together. People sing songs, do dances and any number of crazy little things and sometimes will blow you away with an amazing idea.

That being said, I started training my potential replacements for the LTs at the 30c3 for the reasons you stated, among others.

I believe today, the talks are assembled by a team of three people with each person taking the helm on a particular day.

Hey Ryan,

Let me just start by saying I think you're a totally reasonable person and I respect your thoughts,[1] so let's talk some more about why we've come down seeing things a bit differently here.

So first off, I think that I've seen a lot more consistency from you than from other parts of the Internet. And that's cool, consistency is worth doing and I also agree skepticism is good. It's a value I hold. It's a value I know Meredith holds too.

What is also true though, and I think anyone who examines this closely will also come to the conclusion that claims women make get a much higher degree of skepticism, accusations of bias and face a much higher bar before being accepted or believed.

So even when you just compare responses to tweets people made (Nick tweeted yesterday too) or longer form stories that people wrote (that one site has collected a bunch now) you'll see the stark difference in how people respond to things posted by women vs. things posted by men. It contributes a lot to why being on the Internet as a woman is a much more problematic thing and why women don't get taken seriously.

It's a real thing, and it'd be best if we were able to learn more from it.

Please feel free to spend some more time to examine various threads and comments in various places. I'm sure you'll come to your own conclusions and I'll be interested to hear what you think.

[1] You may not know me, but we've got some mutual friends and I've generally appreciated your commentary before being pretty on the level!

This is why it took me so long to come out with this story. The last thing I want to do is put myself out there only to be dismissed as part of a larger smear campaign (as I was at the time.)

Further: This is a direct description of what I have come to know as Jake's M.O. Not an isolated incident. This has to do with one person's behavior, it has nothing to do with the projects that person was involved with.

Maybe what Jake did to me wasn't all that bad. Maybe I deserved it. Fine, call me whatever form of coward or weakling you want but in the end, this was my hobby and I found other things to do with my life where I didn't have to put up with this level of stress.