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: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Friday August 28 2020, @01:10PM
Its exactly like cops. Protect? Serve? Who could oppose that? I'm sure they never do anything wrong and they need more funding not less, and more leeway to do the right things, not more supervision.
Usually the good guys are obviously good, its the bad guys who put immense effort into posing flowery mission statements and such.
For example, the corporations with the most enthusiastic diversity statements are ALWAYS the least diverse corporations.
So obviously CoCs only exist to be weaponized by bad people.
Nobody can explain who Debian's slaves are. I mean there's owned property who are forced at gunpoint to work for Debian, and we need to protect them by overly legalistic weaponized CoCs, right? Nobody could seriously claim that if Debian were indeed toxic, then people could simply leave or fork. We must protect Debian's slaves because no Debian volunteer has any agency or ability to decide to invest their time elsewhere. Won't somebody please think of the slaves? Only the very best virtue signalling people care about working conditions for Debian's slaves, and virtue signalers could never be inherently toxic.