3 ms·

Edit: Removing my comment after reading the detailed New Yorker article linked from The NY Times.

by joewee 7y ago

bradly 7y ago
> Joi shouldn’t be hung for giving someone the benefit of doubt. Epstein had already been convicted and banned from MIT donations. In a position of leadership you are responsible to keep a healthy and safe workplace. That’s part of the job of running a lab. If you are unable or unwilling to do that, you should not be in a leadership role.
- joewee 7y ago
  Ok maybe I’m missing something. Joi allowed him to visit the lab after he was banned?
  - Twirrim 7y ago
    And took donations after Epstein was disqualified as a funder (after his 2008 conviction), and deliberately manipulated things to make them anonymous. It's blatant, done with full understanding, and (stupidly) with an email trail of evidence. 'In September, 2014, Ito wrote to Epstein soliciting a cash infusion to fund a certain researcher, asking, “Could you re-up/top-off with another $100K so we can extend his contract another year?” Epstein replied, “yes.” Forwarding the response to a member of his staff, Ito wrote, “Make sure this gets accounted for as anonymous.” Peter Cohen, the M.I.T. Media Lab’s Director of Development and Strategy at the time, reiterated, “Jeffrey money, needs to be anonymous. Thanks.”' and ' But the e-mails show that Ito consulted closely with Epstein and actively sought the various donations. At one point, Cohen reached out to Ito for advice about a donor, writing, “you or Jeffrey would know best.”' and so on, and so forth. The article is worth a read.
    - nullc 7y ago
      > And took donations after Epstein was disqualified as a funder (after his 2008 conviction) Can you point me to where it's described exactly when Epstein was blacklisted by MIT and why? If it's in the newyorker article, I'm missing it. It points out that Epstein's donations were anonymous and that he was blacklisted but doesn't appear to order the events. It looks like Epstein was anonymously donating back around 2002 also, so was he also blacklisted then? Why?
      - joewee 7y ago
        It’s in the New Yorker article linked from the nytimes article. But correct there is no timeline. But the references to emails that show leadership trying to hide the source of donations sounds bad.
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    All of this is in the linked article.
dang 7y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20905993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20905993 and marked it off-topic.

Edit: Removing my comment after reading the detailed New Yorker article linked from The NY Times.

by joewee 7y ago

Edit: Removing my comment after reading the detailed New Yorker article linked from The NY Times.

> Joi shouldn’t be hung for giving someone the benefit of doubt. Epstein had already been convicted and banned from MIT donations. In a position of leadership you are responsible to keep a healthy and safe workplace. That’s part of the job of running a lab. If you are unable or unwilling to do that, you should not be in a leadership role.

joewee 7y ago
Ok maybe I’m missing something. Joi allowed him to visit the lab after he was banned?
- Twirrim 7y ago
  And took donations after Epstein was disqualified as a funder (after his 2008 conviction), and deliberately manipulated things to make them anonymous. It's blatant, done with full understanding, and (stupidly) with an email trail of evidence. 'In September, 2014, Ito wrote to Epstein soliciting a cash infusion to fund a certain researcher, asking, “Could you re-up/top-off with another $100K so we can extend his contract another year?” Epstein replied, “yes.” Forwarding the response to a member of his staff, Ito wrote, “Make sure this gets accounted for as anonymous.” Peter Cohen, the M.I.T. Media Lab’s Director of Development and Strategy at the time, reiterated, “Jeffrey money, needs to be anonymous. Thanks.”' and ' But the e-mails show that Ito consulted closely with Epstein and actively sought the various donations. At one point, Cohen reached out to Ito for advice about a donor, writing, “you or Jeffrey would know best.”' and so on, and so forth. The article is worth a read.
  - nullc 7y ago
    > And took donations after Epstein was disqualified as a funder (after his 2008 conviction) Can you point me to where it's described exactly when Epstein was blacklisted by MIT and why? If it's in the newyorker article, I'm missing it. It points out that Epstein's donations were anonymous and that he was blacklisted but doesn't appear to order the events. It looks like Epstein was anonymously donating back around 2002 also, so was he also blacklisted then? Why?
    - joewee 7y ago
      It’s in the New Yorker article linked from the nytimes article. But correct there is no timeline. But the references to emails that show leadership trying to hide the source of donations sounds bad.
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  All of this is in the linked article.

dang 7y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20905993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20905993 and marked it off-topic.