3 ms·

> You think that if this guy literally raped people he should not be excluded from the community he exploited and damaged? Duh, no, and I already explained my

by js8 10y ago

> You think that if this guy literally raped people he should not be excluded from the community he exploited and damaged? Duh, no, and I already explained my position in other comments. Perhaps I should have written "society" instead of "community" in the original comment, that would have been clearer. Any community should be free to shun him, or not to do it. And community which doesn't shouldn't be called out for not doing it. Your question is a little loaded, because you assume that the community feels it was damaged. But maybe it doesn't.

dpark 10y ago
> Duh, no, and I already explained my position in other comments. Perhaps I should have written "society" instead of "community" in the original comment, that would have been clearer. I don't think anyone here has actually proposed that Appelbaum be excluded from society as a whole. It is, however, perfectly legitimate to tell people/communities/society, "Hey, be wary of this guy. He has a history of abuse." > Any community should be free to shun him, or not to do it. And community which doesn't shouldn't be called out for not doing it. It's absolutely reasonable to call out a community for not doing the right thing. If a community is enabling members to do terrible things, they should be called out. If a community is enabling abusers, or sheltering thieves, or otherwise hiding unethical or criminal behavior, it's perfectly correct to say, "Hey, you're an accomplice to the crimes you're enabling." To say that no one should call out the Tor community for enabling Appelbaum is to say that no one should have called out the Catholic Church for hiding child molestation. > Your question is a little loaded, because you assume that the community feels it was damaged. But maybe it doesn't. Clearly at least part of the community feels that Appelbaum has done damage.
- js8 10y ago
  > I don't think anyone here has actually proposed that Appelbaum be excluded from society as a whole. Well, that's how I read the original article (it's an appeal to all tech people to shun him) and some of the comments. > If a community is enabling abusers, or sheltering thieves, or otherwise hiding unethical or criminal behavior But we don't know if he was criminal. It's a matter of justice to decide that. In any case, I meant my original quote assuming that the person gets actually punished if they are found guilty. If they have been punished for their deeds, why should any community be necessarily required to add to that punishment? > To say that no one should call out the Tor community for enabling Appelbaum is to say that no one should have called out the Catholic Church for hiding child molestation. It's not the same. Tor community is not preventing criminal investigation. It's perfectly OK to call out community for interfering with justice (since they are part of the society). But it's not OK to call out some community because it doesn't do extra punishment to people who we consider morally bad. (Also, the Catholic Church case has another dimension which is hypocrisy.)
  - gnaritas 10y ago
    > t's an appeal to all tech people to shun him) Tech != society as a whole. > But we don't know if he was criminal. We know he's an abusive person due to the multiple incidence described in the article which included specifics that can be verified. That's enough to get him shunned regardless of any criminal behavior. > But it's not OK to call out some community because it doesn't do extra punishment to people who we consider morally bad. You're confused, what he's doing is not merely morally bad, it's directly abusive to people, i.e. it's actually bad regardless of any loose morality, there are victims. He's victimizing people with sexually abusive behavior in public, this isn't a simple matter of "morals" being different.
  - dpark 10y ago
    > But we don't know if he was criminal. You're reading selectively. I also mentioned abusers and unethical behavior. You overlooked that because it doesn't fit into your "justice system" narrative. > But it's not OK to call out some community because it doesn't do extra punishment to people who we consider morally bad. Yes, it absolutely is. The problem here is you're worried about punishment when you should be worried about the community. Shunning someone is partly about punishment but it's also largely about protecting the community. It is perfectly right to say "hey, you have predators in your midst and it's hurting some of your community members while you look the other way." The Catholic church issue is extremely relevant because it is the same scenario at a higher level of severity. Predators preying on the weak should be called out, and if the community doesn't do it, they should fully expect those outside the community to do so. Your concerns here are especially nonsensical, though, because it's actually community members calling this guy out.
    - js8 10y ago
      I am worried about the community. But I consider abusers to be part of it, whether you like it or not. I believe that shunning them out completely is worse than trying to rehabilitate them (which means some punishment plus some forgiveness). I see this as a variation of a NIMBY problem. If you consider community as a sort medieval thing, which needs to be protected from outsiders at all cost anyway, it's a perfectly valid strategy to deal with abusers by shunning them out. But modern world is not like that. The abusers have to live somewhere in the society, and if they are not allowed to interact with others, you will get a bigger problem. And arguably, USA applies this strategy the most from all developed world, and it is a cause of considerable problems. And I am saying again, what I specifically disagreed with was the call to other groups to shun him.

by js8 10y ago

dpark 10y ago

> Duh, no, and I already explained my position in other comments. Perhaps I should have written "society" instead of "community" in the original comment, that would have been clearer. I don't think anyone here has actually proposed that Appelbaum be excluded from society as a whole. It is, however, perfectly legitimate to tell people/communities/society, "Hey, be wary of this guy. He has a history of abuse." > Any community should be free to shun him, or not to do it. And community which doesn't shouldn't be called out for not doing it. It's absolutely reasonable to call out a community for not doing the right thing. If a community is enabling members to do terrible things, they should be called out. If a community is enabling abusers, or sheltering thieves, or otherwise hiding unethical or criminal behavior, it's perfectly correct to say, "Hey, you're an accomplice to the crimes you're enabling." To say that no one should call out the Tor community for enabling Appelbaum is to say that no one should have called out the Catholic Church for hiding child molestation. > Your question is a little loaded, because you assume that the community feels it was damaged. But maybe it doesn't. Clearly at least part of the community feels that Appelbaum has done damage.

js8 10y ago
> I don't think anyone here has actually proposed that Appelbaum be excluded from society as a whole. Well, that's how I read the original article (it's an appeal to all tech people to shun him) and some of the comments. > If a community is enabling abusers, or sheltering thieves, or otherwise hiding unethical or criminal behavior But we don't know if he was criminal. It's a matter of justice to decide that. In any case, I meant my original quote assuming that the person gets actually punished if they are found guilty. If they have been punished for their deeds, why should any community be necessarily required to add to that punishment? > To say that no one should call out the Tor community for enabling Appelbaum is to say that no one should have called out the Catholic Church for hiding child molestation. It's not the same. Tor community is not preventing criminal investigation. It's perfectly OK to call out community for interfering with justice (since they are part of the society). But it's not OK to call out some community because it doesn't do extra punishment to people who we consider morally bad. (Also, the Catholic Church case has another dimension which is hypocrisy.)
- gnaritas 10y ago
  > t's an appeal to all tech people to shun him) Tech != society as a whole. > But we don't know if he was criminal. We know he's an abusive person due to the multiple incidence described in the article which included specifics that can be verified. That's enough to get him shunned regardless of any criminal behavior. > But it's not OK to call out some community because it doesn't do extra punishment to people who we consider morally bad. You're confused, what he's doing is not merely morally bad, it's directly abusive to people, i.e. it's actually bad regardless of any loose morality, there are victims. He's victimizing people with sexually abusive behavior in public, this isn't a simple matter of "morals" being different.
- dpark 10y ago
  > But we don't know if he was criminal. You're reading selectively. I also mentioned abusers and unethical behavior. You overlooked that because it doesn't fit into your "justice system" narrative. > But it's not OK to call out some community because it doesn't do extra punishment to people who we consider morally bad. Yes, it absolutely is. The problem here is you're worried about punishment when you should be worried about the community. Shunning someone is partly about punishment but it's also largely about protecting the community. It is perfectly right to say "hey, you have predators in your midst and it's hurting some of your community members while you look the other way." The Catholic church issue is extremely relevant because it is the same scenario at a higher level of severity. Predators preying on the weak should be called out, and if the community doesn't do it, they should fully expect those outside the community to do so. Your concerns here are especially nonsensical, though, because it's actually community members calling this guy out.
  - js8 10y ago
    I am worried about the community. But I consider abusers to be part of it, whether you like it or not. I believe that shunning them out completely is worse than trying to rehabilitate them (which means some punishment plus some forgiveness). I see this as a variation of a NIMBY problem. If you consider community as a sort medieval thing, which needs to be protected from outsiders at all cost anyway, it's a perfectly valid strategy to deal with abusers by shunning them out. But modern world is not like that. The abusers have to live somewhere in the society, and if they are not allowed to interact with others, you will get a bigger problem. And arguably, USA applies this strategy the most from all developed world, and it is a cause of considerable problems. And I am saying again, what I specifically disagreed with was the call to other groups to shun him.