The author says:

> Tor Project’s director went on to tell Wired that someone was indeed raped, that the project is working with legal, and that she “absolutely believes” the victim.

The Wired story is this: https://www.wired.com/2016/06/tor-developer-jacob-appelbaum-...

There's no name, but you have the potential for a legal case to be brought up. And, at the very least, you have the Tor Project's executive director, Shari Steele, publicly endorsing the rape accuser's actions.

That said, it's not nothing for Violet Blue (or anyone) to detail the harassment allegations that she has, one of which has at least a named witness (the editor of WIRED). Just because repeatedly telling your colleague that you'd like to fuck-them-oh-please-why-won't-you-fuck-me isn't technically rape or something that can be elevated to a criminal charge [0], that doesn't mean that it's not abuse that warrants kicking someone out of an organization.

Besides Violet Blue, Nick Farr wrote a lengthy post alleging non-sexual harassment against Appelbaum: https://medium.com/@nickf4rr/hi-im-nick-farr-nickf4rr-35c32f...

[0] Sure, that kind of harassment probably violates a criminal statute, technically. But that's not the only criteria...you also have: what the detective believes is criminal, what the district attorney believes is criminal, and even what the judge/grand jury feels is criminal (because the judge/grand jury can override the district attorney if they don't feel the charges are supported by evidence), before a criminal charge is official.

> Just because repeatedly telling your colleague that you'd like to fuck-them-oh-please-why-won't-you-fuck-me isn't technically rape or something that can be elevated to a criminal charge [0], that doesn't mean that it's not abuse that warrants kicking someone out of an organization.

And even though it's not criminal, it is definitely not legal in the workplace. The employer has an obligation to not allow this type of behavior to go unchecked.

> Just because repeatedly telling your colleague that you'd like to fuck-them-oh-please-why-won't-you-fuck-me isn't technically rape or something that can be elevated to a criminal charge

Seems to be pretty textbook (not just "in theory", but "as applied in practice") criminal harassment; the only reason that it normally wouldn't be subject to criminal action is because usually between work colleagues, the fact that the threshold for workplace civil liability for sexual harassment is so much lower than that for criminal harassment in this area would result in workplace action resolving the problem before it reached a criminal level (or without anyone feeling the need to escalate to involve police even if it had reached the level it has.)

I'm giving Appelbaum as much neutral benefit of the doubt as possible...There are definitely some workplaces where such a proposition is so counter to the culture that someone repeatedly and blatantly violating that etiquette should cause warning flags to go up ("when in Rome..."). And there are other workplaces that may have a culture of being more sexually open, and where it's easier to rationalize away someone's behavior by saying, "well, lots of people try to hook up...maybe he was just getting the wrong signals...?"

So what might technically be criminal might not really feel like harassment, just a massive misunderstanding...it's only when more and more people speak up that the "misunderstanding" explanation becomes hard to believe.

That said...there is one other factor specific to Tor project that I would have to guess most definitely dampened the enthusiasm to level criminal charges, no matter how justified: bringing in cops means bringing in people who will search your phone and the accuser's phone (and email, and so forth). There's no way even the most harassed person at Tor Project could go the cops without a lot of personal turmoil and doubt.

Even putting aside whether he is a literal rapist or not, it sounds like he is blatantly guilty of being a serial sexual harasser. The examples of public behaviour he is noted for in the article are completely beyond the pale.

Probably blatantly guilty, though it didn't help that when the fog finally cleared and we finally got a detailed story of him sexually harassing a drunken stranger in public, corraborated by multiple named and trustworthy people, it promptly imploded after the woman in question apparently came forward and said she was neither a stranger nor being harassed. I assume that some of the newer claims are actually true, but that a whole bunch of trustworthy-seeming people were willing to stand behind a claim that fell apart like that... well, it doesn't inspire trust.

Certainly, but it just concerns me how bad they're working to make this guy out as a rapist, when no one has been willing to put their name on an actual rape accusation.

Is that your takeaway from that post? Out of over 3000 words, "rape" was literally only mentioned twice. The rest of it was an account of A LOT of appalling and unacceptable sexual harassment.

isis agora lovecruft among others has put her name explicitly on this: "Sometime around 5 o’clock in the morning, I woke up very confused and startled because my pants were unzipped and Jake’s arm was wrapped around me, his hands in my underwear and he was rubbing my clit and rimming the edges of my vagina. I tried to shove him off me and wake him up."

You are saying, "it just concerns me how bad they're working to make this guy out as a rapist when no one has put their names explicitly to actual penetration, as opposed to mere sexual assault."

Not at all what I was going for. I hadn't heard that one, not in such detail at least. I had heard mostly about some offensive comments and a proposition, but nothing that awful.

That's basically exactly what I was looking for actually. Must have missed it. Thanks.

I'll stick to commenting on technical topics... This has just been a mess. Try to ask some questions and you just get slagged around here if you're not 100% up to speed.

Thanks though.

These discussions are always a mess :)

> when no one has been willing to put their name on an actual rape accusation.

Reading threads like this (including the flagged comments) is that any wonder?

My housemate dated him for a while. It's pretty much all true.

If I'm reading it right, violetblue. (and 9 others listed in one paragraph of the article)

This paragraph from the article: "More witnesses and stories have surfaced since. These include Bill Budington of the EFF, Micah Lee of the Intercept, Nick Farr, Quinn Norton, Leigh Honeywell, Alison Macrina, Andrea Shepard, Meredith Patterson, and Isis Agora Lovecruft."

Yes, but unless I'm mistaken, none of those people have publicly put their name on a rape accusation.

This seems to meet the definition of attacked:

   The convincing turned into trying to pull her away   
   physically, grabbing at her hands. I locked my arm with
   hers, and put myself in between her and Jake. All while he
   was trying to reach around me, while he was telling me to
   let go.

Not raped though, which is what I was trying to get at. Sorry if I was vague. You're right, the evidence of many other incidents is indeed there.

In conjunction with the description of involuntary genital exploration that normally precedes the above quote it was, unambiguously, an episode of sexual assault.

You can debate whether digital-only -- but nonetheless involuntary -- stimulation fits the legal definition of "rape" in this or that jurisdiction, if you want. But if so, you'd be splitting hairs.

Yeah, check the post times.

The article has some links in it, I read another account from Isis Lovecruft, whoever that is.

Do you not consider his claimed behavior to the author of the article to be an "attack"? Or do you regard the author as not having given their "real name"?