4 ms·
Whistleblowing, when making allegations against an individual, is best done under non-pseudonyms and inviting possible libel/slander charges. If you're making a
by ris 9y ago
Whistleblowing, when making allegations against an individual, is best done under non-pseudonyms and inviting possible libel/slander charges. If you're making allegations of this severity, it seems it would be better to straighten out the facts of what happened in a court of law rather than let the court of public opinion make its judgement. The "informality" of all of this makes me quite uncomfortable.
- sp332 9y agoGetting a court involved won't solve the community problem. If multiple active members of the community come forward, that should have more weight then a random judge's ruling. Nothing will compel them to "believe" or act like they believe the judge either. Two women, including the author of the article, put their own names on their allegations.
- ivanbakel 9y agoWould it even make sense for a pseudo-anarchist hacker group to accept the word of a court as a valid final judgement? It's hard to believe "leave it to the courts" wouldn't just become "what do the courts know", because the final goal is nothing more than avoiding any kind of responsibility.
- sp332 9y agoI found the article I was thinking of, turns out it was on the same blog. https://blog.patternsinthevoid.net/the-forest-for-the-trees.html https://blog.patternsinthevoid.net/the-forest-for-the-trees.... After describing the specific allegations at the top, it describes the kind of justice the victims are looking for. I found it very helpful.
- ivanbakel 9y agoA valuable read. It's slightly surprising to consider that not wanting a court intervention doesn't come from a lack of trust in the pursual of convictions. I was more considering the CCC's perspective, though - they can demand the court as an authority, but their own political position would make that authority easily dismissable. What does a hacker group even consider as the "word of God", so to speak, if not their own community? Any kind of consensus-building about "what (actually) happened" will just seem steeped in CYA-dishonesty.
- ris 9y agoIt is not about a "random judge's ruling" - a proper court of law has very specific safeguards in place to ensure that both parties have a equal chance to make their voice heard and put their case forward. Now, it's possible to argue that those safeguards do not always work perfectly but it's something I have far more confidence in than blog posts, which have none of those requirements.