SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Software engineer, Debian developer, and recognized Free/Open Source Software innovator Daniel Pocock scratches the surface on the 2016 explusion of journalist, security researcher, and hacker Jacob Appelbaum from Debian. He asserts that the leadership in Debian at the time falsified evidence and hid conflicts of interest when dealing with the allegations against Appelbaum.
In 2016, there was an enormous amount of noise about Jacob Appelbaum from the Tor Project and winner of the Henri Nannen Prize for journalism.
An anonymous web site had been set up with allegations of harassment, abuse and rape. Unlike the #MeToo movement, which came later, nobody identified themselves and nobody filed a police complaint. It appears that the site was run by people who live in another country and have no daily contact with Appelbaum. Therefore, many people feel this wasn't about justice or immediate threats to their safety.
Long discussions took place in the private mailing lists of many free software communities, including Debian. Personally, as a I focus on my employer, clients and family and as there are so many long email discussions in Debian, I don't follow most of these things. I've come to regret that as it is now clear that at least some claims may have been falsified, a serious injustice has transpired and this could have been easily detected.
I don't wish to discount the experiences of anybody who has been a victim of a crime. However, in the correspondence that was circulated within Debian, the only person who has technically been harassed is Jacob Appelbaum himself. If Appelbaum does have a case to answer then organizations muddying the waters, inventing additional victims, may undermine the stories of real victims.
He then goes on to provide supporting evidence — including what was falsified and how the falsifications were used by the press — and then, from there, used against Appelbaum.
Previously:
(2016) Jacob Appelbaum Leaves the Tor Project
(2014) Hackers Replicate NSA's Leaked Bugging Devices
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 28 2020, @01:31AM (7 children)
Agreed, if the allegations are true, Appelbaum was terribly wronged.
But, Daniel Pocock is engaging in the same sort of attacks without evidence that he claims others made. Here he is spreading a rumor that Zini "might" have been party to a rape:
I don't think this author is credible from just that passage alone. He appears to have a vendetta himself. But, hopefully his post will prompt discussions within Debian, and the truth will come out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 28 2020, @03:50PM
Daniel has integrity and an autistic desire for rational thinking and justice. The man has integrity and he stood up for several Debian developer colleagues in the past, even if he stood there alone. If I have read Daniels character right, I believe that he would stand up for Zini just as he would any other Debian developer.
I can follow what you say somewhat, but since Zini was spearheading the Debian campaign against Appelbaum, he implicitly claims to know the truth or as Daniel said is incompetent (I would add a third, naive). Daniel is not saying Zini was there, he presents Zinis confidence in what happened as a snarky comment. There is a huge difference.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 28 2020, @03:51PM (5 children)
To whomever modded parent as flamebait, please explain yourself.
There is nothing "flamebait" about the parent post. But, using this inappropriate mod does serve to hide comments from others. At this point, it appears you have very strong feelings on this subject, and a reasoned, "Lets wait for evidence and confirmation from a less biased sounding source before we gather the torches and pitchforks," comment offends your sense of outrage. So, you inappropriately modded the comment to bury it.
While I love that Soylent was brave enough to allow any registered user to mod posts, and that they provide generous mod points, abuse, like this, of mod privileges makes this community a poorer place.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday August 29 2020, @01:28AM (3 children)
When I don't know the truth of something, but find the material of interest... I use the "interesting" mod. As I did in this case. I have no idea who is right or wrong here, but this was a different perspective, thus worth bringing into the light so others may comment on it. How else can one get to the truth of what is apparently a tangled mess?
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2020, @03:10AM (1 child)
Interesting is fine. The question was from when the post was modded "flamebait".
I don't know how common it is, but when I see posts modded troll or flamebait, I usually do not expand and read them. I'm certain there are folks who are better than me who do (your reading the post and re-modding it "interesting" is proof of that. But, I would be very surprised if there wasn't a sizeable percentage of readers who, like me, tend to skip over flamebait and troll modded comments.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Sunday August 30 2020, @11:13PM
I've seen so many good comments modded flamebait and troll that I kinda ignore those tags; if anything they're a cue that maybe I should look closer, in case it's an unfair mod (eg. name-calling to indicate disagreement).
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2020, @03:18AM
I should have added to the line, "Interesting is fine"... Even Disagree and modding down is fine. It is tagging a post that is not to my eye in any way flamebait as flamebait tht I objected to. Flamebait has a specific meaning.
So, I asked that person who tagged the post flamebait to explain why he/she did that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2020, @04:10PM
lol you have a right to disagree, just as anyone else has a right to "flamebait". get over yourself.