4 ms·

> Specifically, this: "When harassment, sexual or otherwise, requires a cost-benefit analysis, you have failed." JA was not essential for Tor's continued survi

> Specifically, this: "When harassment, sexual or otherwise, requires a cost-benefit analysis, you have failed." JA was not essential for Tor's continued survival as a project and a movement. They chose the convenience of a good developer at the cost of his victims. Are you going to personally tell the victims that their sacrifice was worth it, because Tor is better than ever?

js8 10y ago
> Are you going to personally tell the victims that their sacrifice was worth it, because Tor is better than ever? Probably not, I don't know any of them personally. > They chose the convenience of a good developer at the cost of his victims. That's one interpretation. But maybe the community around Tor decided that these accusations are independent problem, which should be dealt with by the police and justice system. I am not part of that community, so I cannot tell them how to deal with it; they should have freedom to decide for themselves. Yes, maybe they will make some other members unhappy in the process. Suppose the illegal act in question is a little different. It gets revealed that famous person in OSS project cheated on taxes. Should there be a call trying to ban him from working on OSS? Should everybody denounce his work? Or should he just get his punishment and continue with whatever he was doing?
- dpark 10y ago
  > they should have freedom to decide for themselves. Yes, maybe they will make some other members unhappy in the process. They can and do have the freedom to decide for themselves. Right now they seem to be deciding that this guy should be excluded because it's better for the community. Some people struggle to understand when it's okay to exclude others, presumably because they were excluded at some point and found it hurtful. Sometimes, though, the person you are trying to include is hurtful, and the rest of the community suffers as a result. By excluding a hurtful person, you include others who are driven away by the hurtful person. You might think that you're giving the "choice" to everyone by keeping the hurtful person in the community, but you aren't. The people driven away by the dangerous, hurtful, or just plain abrasive people don't have the choice to participate in a healthy community. So long as the community chooses to include hurtful people, they choose to exclude the people victimized by those hurtful people. I have friends who were really into tabletop gaming (e.g. Warhammer 40k). They used to go to the gaming store to play with other people in the gaming community. They stopped going because a number of the players there were assholes. They were abrasive, and made creepy remarks toward women, and generally made it unpleasant to be there. New people would show up to play a few times, have a bad interaction, and stop coming. Other people also stopped going because of this, which meant the assholes were an even bigger piece of the community. Eventually my friends stopped going entirely because the community wasn't fun to engage with anymore. Including the assholes drove away too many of the good community members. Including the assholes hurt everyone else. > It gets revealed that famous person in OSS project cheated on taxes. Should there be a call trying to ban him from working on OSS? This is entirely different, because in the case of Appelbaum, the community is (allegedly) being victimized. If he'd cheated on his taxes, no one would likely be calling for him to be excluded from the community. If he were repeatedly stealing from his co-workers wallets? Yeah, there would probably be a call to exclude him because he's toxic.

js8 10y ago

> Are you going to personally tell the victims that their sacrifice was worth it, because Tor is better than ever? Probably not, I don't know any of them personally. > They chose the convenience of a good developer at the cost of his victims. That's one interpretation. But maybe the community around Tor decided that these accusations are independent problem, which should be dealt with by the police and justice system. I am not part of that community, so I cannot tell them how to deal with it; they should have freedom to decide for themselves. Yes, maybe they will make some other members unhappy in the process. Suppose the illegal act in question is a little different. It gets revealed that famous person in OSS project cheated on taxes. Should there be a call trying to ban him from working on OSS? Should everybody denounce his work? Or should he just get his punishment and continue with whatever he was doing?

dpark 10y ago
> they should have freedom to decide for themselves. Yes, maybe they will make some other members unhappy in the process. They can and do have the freedom to decide for themselves. Right now they seem to be deciding that this guy should be excluded because it's better for the community. Some people struggle to understand when it's okay to exclude others, presumably because they were excluded at some point and found it hurtful. Sometimes, though, the person you are trying to include is hurtful, and the rest of the community suffers as a result. By excluding a hurtful person, you include others who are driven away by the hurtful person. You might think that you're giving the "choice" to everyone by keeping the hurtful person in the community, but you aren't. The people driven away by the dangerous, hurtful, or just plain abrasive people don't have the choice to participate in a healthy community. So long as the community chooses to include hurtful people, they choose to exclude the people victimized by those hurtful people. I have friends who were really into tabletop gaming (e.g. Warhammer 40k). They used to go to the gaming store to play with other people in the gaming community. They stopped going because a number of the players there were assholes. They were abrasive, and made creepy remarks toward women, and generally made it unpleasant to be there. New people would show up to play a few times, have a bad interaction, and stop coming. Other people also stopped going because of this, which meant the assholes were an even bigger piece of the community. Eventually my friends stopped going entirely because the community wasn't fun to engage with anymore. Including the assholes drove away too many of the good community members. Including the assholes hurt everyone else. > It gets revealed that famous person in OSS project cheated on taxes. Should there be a call trying to ban him from working on OSS? This is entirely different, because in the case of Appelbaum, the community is (allegedly) being victimized. If he'd cheated on his taxes, no one would likely be calling for him to be excluded from the community. If he were repeatedly stealing from his co-workers wallets? Yeah, there would probably be a call to exclude him because he's toxic.