“But he does good work.” • Hacker News Board

Re: “But he does good work.”

#171

Post by danso » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:34 PM UTC

guard-of-terra wrote: post #143

danso wrote: post #15

I typed this response to a comment that called the OP "mostly bullshit" and that if someone does wrong, it is incumbent upon the victim to file charges or forever hold their peace. The comment was flagged so I couldn't submit what I typed, so I've pasted it here. I agree that it's hard to find black and white in accusations...but I'd argue that even the judicial system leaves more than enough gray to argue over. And…

But sitting and waiting for the problem to resolve is also very stupid and leads to learned helplessness. How would rape problem ever get fixed if there are no cases and no time served? It's a probiel when crime is blamed on "rape culture" rather on a concrete person. That's like accusing everybody but the perpetrator. Making IT community resolve rape cases instead of specific authorities is counterproductive too. I…

That's a difficult question to apply to the situation at hand...it seems like a lot of the allegations that are coming out now are workplace-harassment issues and complaints about egregiously creepy/offensive behavior. Between now and the incidents behind these complaints, someone had reported an actual rape, and that may be something that goes to the courts.

Sure, the people who experienced Appelbaum's harassing behavior could've spoken up and possibly averted the alleged rape by having him kicked out on the basis of his unpleasant behavior alone.

However, it's not easy to get someone kicked out based on allegations of behavior, especially someone as high up as him. I mean, that story of bureaucracy and shit rolling downhill is as old as civilization. And it's not all upside to have an organization where people get kicked out via accusation and internal arbitration alone.

Let's assume that some of this abusive behavior warranted official action via the courts (criminal or civil). But those who critique Violet Blue and her allies overlook an obvious problem: if you report a crime to the cops, they now have the authority to get all in your emails and other organization business. Giving Violet Blue and her friends the benefit of the doubt that they are true believers in the Tor project...I find it exceptionally easy to sympathize with how they were able to rationalize not going public about Appelbaum earlier. It's bad enough to cause emotional rift within an organization, no matter how justified...but to risk destroying an organization that you believe is saving lives and protecting freedom...yeah, that's kind of a hard thing to risk taking to court, even for black-and-white crimes.

Re: “But he does good work.”

#172

Post by stale2002 » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:34 PM UTC

js8 wrote: post #54

andrewvc wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone repeatedly raped and made inappropriate sexual comments about your family members banning them from family events would be considered about the mildest thing you could do. This guy should be in prison for rape. But even disregarding the actual illegal things this guy has done, his other behavior alone disqualifies him from interacting with others in the community, esp. as a community leader.

I agree with that, assuming he is guilty. On the other hand, it's up to the particular community (or employer) to weight the situation. I don't think doing something illegal should mean that every community should shun you, and it seems to me that's what the article calls for.

The problem is that the guy is literally a danger to the community.

Allowing him to go to events and parties is literally putting your attendees in danger.

Re: “But he does good work.”

#173

Post by srtjstjsj » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC

clavalle wrote: post #62

Perhaps I am being stereotypically Texan here, but sometimes I wish there was space in our legal and ethical system to kick someone's ass for behavior that doesn't reach the level of provable criminality but that still calls for more than a sharp rebuke, public shaming, or ostracism. Our current status quo of 'violence is never the answer' seems to give assholes a bit too much wiggle room to make the rest of us suffe…

We banned that for a reason.

_Who_ decides what calls for more than a sharp rebuke?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching

Re: “But he does good work.”

#174

Post by srtjstjsj » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #88

clavalle wrote: post #62

Perhaps I am being stereotypically Texan here, but sometimes I wish there was space in our legal and ethical system to kick someone's ass for behavior that doesn't reach the level of provable criminality but that still calls for more than a sharp rebuke, public shaming, or ostracism. Our current status quo of 'violence is never the answer' seems to give assholes a bit too much wiggle room to make the rest of us suffe…

In many jurisdictions, that space does exist, because cops and prosecutors are comfortable "looking the other way" when it's clear there is a reason to do so. It is to Texas's credit that much of that state is such a jurisdiction, but in fact much of the fly-over country is. Of course, a fake-ass "anarchist" like Applebaum might file a civil suit for a well-deserved ass-kicking, but that's still sunlight.

fake?

Re: “But he does good work.”

#175

Post by moon_of_moon » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC

kemayo wrote: post #149

moon_of_moon wrote: post #82

Applebaum's side of the story: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1soorlp

The article links to that, and also to this "decoding" of it: https://medium.com/@frabyn/decoding-jake-appelbaum-9fa75d060...

Why decode it? Take it at face value:

"I want to be clear: the accusations of criminal sexual misconduct against me are entirely false."

"I’ve dedicated my life as a journalist, activist, and longtime member of the Tor Project to advocating for the transparency of public processes and to speaking out about the necessity of privacy, security, and anonymity. These are ideals that I will continue to uphold, despite the vicious campaign that is currently being waged against me."

This guy spent two years in foster care when he was a kid. That kind of adversity, in my opinion, rears character.

Re: “But he does good work.”

#176

Post by avocad » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC

smoyer wrote: post #64

From an older guy (and happily married) guy to the male population in tech. If you see behaviors like this and let it happen, you're complicit ... if you're in a position of authority (someone's boss) and you let it happen, you may also be criminally liable. But it's far worse ... what I hope is a small minority of bad actors are defining the definition of male in our culture. Since there's an even smaller number men…

I agree with you, and before reading yours I wanted to write a less theatrical comment in the same line. I figure people like Appelbaum are making tech a hostile environment for women to work in, like a vicious circle.

The thing that drew my attention was the public comment he made about giving head. Because why would anyone want to work with a person who behaves like that? He probably knows how to pick an audience, but the real explanation came at the end of the article:

"People like Jake can be found in other places (...) Wherever power imbalances, hero worship, and secret-keepers intersect."

And those are places that independent people like to avoid. And that might be an explanation for why so many people never heard of stories like that in their surroundings.

Re: “But he does good work.”

#177

Post by camperman » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC

vtlynch wrote: post #56

camperman wrote: post #38

A blog is no substitute for due process. Appelbaum may be guilty of all of the things he's been accused of, he may be guilty of none of them. Let's see some formal charges, sworn witness statements and court proceedings before we decide. False accusations can and do happen all the time.

Suggesting that the volume of accusations and eyewitness accounts that have been made against Appelbaum may be "false accusations" is a shameful thing to do.

I wasn't but even if I was it isn't shameful at all - it's how justice works in Western societies. Someone is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Allegations are just that - allegations. If there are a wide variety of them independently from different people, then it's more likely that there is something to them but that still doesn't mean you can just rush to judgement. That way lies Duke Lacrosse, Mattress Girl and A Rape On Campus just off the top of my head.

Re: “But he does good work.”

#178

Post by threatofrain » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC

lusen wrote: post #140

shasta wrote: post #108

Is there really a big problem with acceptable/legal behavior not being agreed upon? Isn't the problem usually that the guy claims "it was consensual?" Similarly, when police consider what a woman was wearing, isn't usually in the context of figuring out who's story they believe? In other words, the police aren't thinking "well, she wore a sexy dress and followed him to his room and therefore deserved to get raped" bu…

> "well, she wore a sexy dress and followed him up to his room so maybe his claims that it was consensual are true." how is that reasonable? maybe we should ask what she claims and what he wore. but wait, what clothing indicates whether someone is a rapist? tshirts and tatty jeans? polo shirt? suit? of course clothing implies nothing. why does her wearing "sexy" clothing -- to say nothing of "sexy" being all about th…

When the police and justice system collects information about clothing, sexual history with defendant, alcohol and other drugs, they do so because these are legally relevant facts to establishing a narrative that's otherwise often too lacking in material basis.

The police and justice system wish to know these facts so they know the strength of some legal narrative and what counternarratives can be supported. Wearing sexy clothing fits a narrative of consensual sex. Sexual injuries fits a narrative of sexual assault. Drug use damages the credibility of any party. Prior relationship with defendant can fit narratives about the likelihood that someone might agree to sex.

These are facts that defense will ask, and it's best for the prosecution that the police ask first on their terms to control the progression of fact discovery, as opposed to letting the defense ask first on their terms.

Why not be interested in what the man was wearing? Maybe because the prosecution, in anticipation of defense strategy, thinks it won't matter. The job of the police is not to act as a neutral 3rd party to the justice system, proportionally investigating claims on the strength of their merits. The secondary job of the police is to set up cases for the prosecution, even if it's unfair to the defense. The primary job of the police, and any agency, is to establish its own credibility, robustness, and scope as an agency. Note that I am speaking descriptively, not prescriptively.

Re: “But he does good work.”

#179

Post by kaitai » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:37 PM UTC

ultramancool wrote: post #139

kaitai wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

isis agora lovecruft among others has put her name explicitly on this: "Sometime around 5 o’clock in the morning, I woke up very confused and startled because my pants were unzipped and Jake’s arm was wrapped around me, his hands in my underwear and he was rubbing my clit and rimming the edges of my vagina. I tried to shove him off me and wake him up." You are saying, "it just concerns me how bad they're working to m…

Not at all what I was going for. I hadn't heard that one, not in such detail at least. I had heard mostly about some offensive comments and a proposition, but nothing that awful. That's basically exactly what I was looking for actually. Must have missed it. Thanks. I'll stick to commenting on technical topics... This has just been a mess. Try to ask some questions and you just get slagged around here if you're not 10…

These discussions are always a mess :)

Re: “But he does good work.”

#180

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jun 21, 2016, 4:37 PM UTC

danso wrote: post #86

ultramancool wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone actually put their real name on something saying they were personally attacked by him yet? Last I checked everything was just vague accusations, has this changed?

The author says: > Tor Project’s director went on to tell Wired that someone was indeed raped, that the project is working with legal, and that she “absolutely believes” the victim. The Wired story is this: https://www.wired.com/2016/06/tor-developer-jacob-appelbaum-... There's no name, but you have the potential for a legal case to be brought up. And, at the very least, you have the Tor Project's executive director,…

> Just because repeatedly telling your colleague that you'd like to fuck-them-oh-please-why-won't-you-fuck-me isn't technically rape or something that can be elevated to a criminal charge

Seems to be pretty textbook (not just "in theory", but "as applied in practice") criminal harassment; the only reason that it normally wouldn't be subject to criminal action is because usually between work colleagues, the fact that the threshold for workplace civil liability for sexual harassment is so much lower than that for criminal harassment in this area would result in workplace action resolving the problem before it reached a criminal level (or without anyone feeling the need to escalate to involve police even if it had reached the level it has.)