5 ms·

Jacob Appelbaum: Inconsistencies in Rape Allegations

15 points by treigerm 10y ago

mpweiher 10y ago
German title is "Severe Doubts about Rape Allegations". Isn't it weird that all these data privacy/whistleblower activists are being targeted by rape allegations that are more than dubious?
- douche 10y ago
  Funny, that. Doesn't tend to increase anyone's credibility when they have the scarlet R hung on them, even if it eventually gets crossed out.
dalke 10y ago
The described inconsistency is in the account by the pseudonym 'River', which was one of the "unidentified individuals [who] posted several specific instances on a website in which they anonymously accused Jacob Appelbaum of having sexually, emotionally, physically abused them." Since then, several of those unidentified persons have identified themselves. According to Wikipedia, three of them are Honeywell, Macrina, and Lovecruft. The piece characterizes Appelbaum's statement as "the statements from "River" were completely fabricated." Neither he nor Zeit say or imply that the accounts of Honeywell, Macrina, and Lovecruft were incorrect. In fact, the Zeit piece does not mention them at all. Casting doubt one account does not immediately cast doubt on all accounts. Otherwise it would be easy to set up the proverbial false flag operation. As a reminder, the reason the Tor project "released" (to quote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Appelbaum#Allegations_of_sexual_misconduct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Appelbaum#Allegations_of... ) is because: "many people inside and outside the Tor Project have reported incidents of being humiliated, intimidated, bullied, and frightened" by Jacob Appelbaum, and that "several experienced unwanted sexually aggressive behavior from him." Steele made no mention of rape claims published on the anonymous website. The decision, at least as publicly given, was not due to any rape allegations. One does not need to be charged by the police before a company can fire a employee who, say, steals from petty cash.
- mpweiher 10y ago
  Well: a second person who was listed as a "victim" came forward to dispute she ever was victimised in any way, and that the account of her experience was severely manipulated. (It has since been taken down). So that's at least 2 of the accusations that are somewhere between plain false and maliciously fabricated, with nothing on the veracity or lack thereof of the rest. I don't know the guy, or what happened, but colour me suspicious, especially when you consider how the allegations were/are being made: not in any legal forum, but in a glossy PR website + campaign. Doesn't pass the smell test.
  - dalke 10y ago
    As a general point of order, one does not need to have a "victim", in scare quotes or otherwise, in order to be in violation of an organization's policies. For example, a school may prohibit a teacher from engaging in a sexual or emotional relationship with a student, even if both the teacher and the student want the relationship. Similarly, between a supervisor and employee, or between a military officer and a private. Such behavior may be grounds for dismissal, even though a relationship between consenting adults is not illegal and therefore has no reason to be "in any legal forum". As I pointed out, even when something is illegal, as when an employee steals from petty cash, the employer does not need to present the case in a legal forum before dismissing the thief. So your strong desire for presenting in a legal forum also does not pass the smell test.
    - mpweiher 10y ago
      The article is not about Applebaum's dismissal from the Tor project, it is about the rape/abuse allegations. Allegations that so far appear to be at best false (1 case apparently completely fabricated and withdrawn on request by the alleged "victim" [and FYI, the scare quotes are entirely appropriate here], 1 other case contradicted by witnesses). Depending on the organisation and the relationship to that organisation, no reasons are necessary whatsoever to sever a relationship (for example in the US almost all employment relationships are "at will"). So what exactly is your point regarding the content of the article, which, again, is about the rape/abuse allegations?

15 points by treigerm 10y ago

German title is "Severe Doubts about Rape Allegations". Isn't it weird that all these data privacy/whistleblower activists are being targeted by rape allegations that are more than dubious?

douche 10y ago
Funny, that. Doesn't tend to increase anyone's credibility when they have the scarlet R hung on them, even if it eventually gets crossed out.

dalke 10y ago

The described inconsistency is in the account by the pseudonym 'River', which was one of the "unidentified individuals [who] posted several specific instances on a website in which they anonymously accused Jacob Appelbaum of having sexually, emotionally, physically abused them." Since then, several of those unidentified persons have identified themselves. According to Wikipedia, three of them are Honeywell, Macrina, and Lovecruft. The piece characterizes Appelbaum's statement as "the statements from "River" were completely fabricated." Neither he nor Zeit say or imply that the accounts of Honeywell, Macrina, and Lovecruft were incorrect. In fact, the Zeit piece does not mention them at all. Casting doubt one account does not immediately cast doubt on all accounts. Otherwise it would be easy to set up the proverbial false flag operation. As a reminder, the reason the Tor project "released" (to quote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Appelbaum#Allegations_of_sexual_misconduct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Appelbaum#Allegations_of... ) is because: "many people inside and outside the Tor Project have reported incidents of being humiliated, intimidated, bullied, and frightened" by Jacob Appelbaum, and that "several experienced unwanted sexually aggressive behavior from him." Steele made no mention of rape claims published on the anonymous website. The decision, at least as publicly given, was not due to any rape allegations. One does not need to be charged by the police before a company can fire a employee who, say, steals from petty cash.

mpweiher 10y ago
Well: a second person who was listed as a "victim" came forward to dispute she ever was victimised in any way, and that the account of her experience was severely manipulated. (It has since been taken down). So that's at least 2 of the accusations that are somewhere between plain false and maliciously fabricated, with nothing on the veracity or lack thereof of the rest. I don't know the guy, or what happened, but colour me suspicious, especially when you consider how the allegations were/are being made: not in any legal forum, but in a glossy PR website + campaign. Doesn't pass the smell test.
- dalke 10y ago
  As a general point of order, one does not need to have a "victim", in scare quotes or otherwise, in order to be in violation of an organization's policies. For example, a school may prohibit a teacher from engaging in a sexual or emotional relationship with a student, even if both the teacher and the student want the relationship. Similarly, between a supervisor and employee, or between a military officer and a private. Such behavior may be grounds for dismissal, even though a relationship between consenting adults is not illegal and therefore has no reason to be "in any legal forum". As I pointed out, even when something is illegal, as when an employee steals from petty cash, the employer does not need to present the case in a legal forum before dismissing the thief. So your strong desire for presenting in a legal forum also does not pass the smell test.
  - mpweiher 10y ago
    The article is not about Applebaum's dismissal from the Tor project, it is about the rape/abuse allegations. Allegations that so far appear to be at best false (1 case apparently completely fabricated and withdrawn on request by the alleged "victim" [and FYI, the scare quotes are entirely appropriate here], 1 other case contradicted by witnesses). Depending on the organisation and the relationship to that organisation, no reasons are necessary whatsoever to sever a relationship (for example in the US almost all employment relationships are "at will"). So what exactly is your point regarding the content of the article, which, again, is about the rape/abuse allegations?