Re:A New Tor Bridge Authority
by pdkl95 on Saturday September 03, 2016 @02:10AM
(#12417989)
> It's not a witch hunt because it's not looking to destroy someone.
Is this some sort of a joke? Maybe some people wanted a more limited result, but that isn't what happened. Did you miss the twitter account named @TimeToDieJake? (now renamed to @VictimsOfJake) How, exactly, is publicly shaming someone and calling for them to be excommunicated from their community anything other than "looking to destroy someone"?
> doesn't advocate for any punishment
Jake must be excluded from all community activities
as a precondition for healing.
I would describe that as not only advocating for a very specific punishment, but demanding that the punishment must happen. Do you want to pretend that being excluded from your community isn't a punishment? Really?
> It's hardly us-vs-them
Yes, it is, until a formal process occurs where the accusation and rebuttal are heard and an independent judgment finds the accusation is true. Again, you're completely ignoring the process of verifying the accusation.
> Obviously the victims want him kept away from conferences for a time
That's fine as a temporary measure until a form judicial process either confirms the accusation or finds that the accused is innocent.
> Again, no "vengeance" or punishment.
You must have read another document, as your new link repeats several items and advocates for punishment in much stronger language.
--
Again, i don't know what happened and make no claims about the validity of the accusations. I'm trying to point out that this kind of witch hunt based on pre-judging someone from only an accusation should terrify you. Guilty until proven innocent is a dangerous precedent to set... even if the accused really deserves it.
You might try reading the links I provided previously. Even if Jake did the terrible things he's accused of, ignoring the principles of justice and simply judging him guilty sets a precedent where you might be judge guilty on a mere accusation in the future.
Is this some sort of a joke? Maybe some people wanted a more limited result, but that isn't what happened. Did you miss the twitter account named @TimeToDieJake? (now renamed to @VictimsOfJake) How, exactly, is publicly shaming someone and calling for them to be excommunicated from their community anything other than "looking to destroy someone"?
> doesn't advocate for any punishment
I would describe that as not only advocating for a very specific punishment, but demanding that the punishment must happen. Do you want to pretend that being excluded from your community isn't a punishment? Really?> It's hardly us-vs-them
Yes, it is, until a formal process occurs where the accusation and rebuttal are heard and an independent judgment finds the accusation is true. Again, you're completely ignoring the process of verifying the accusation.
> Obviously the victims want him kept away from conferences for a time
That's fine as a temporary measure until a form judicial process either confirms the accusation or finds that the accused is innocent.
> Again, no "vengeance" or punishment.
You must have read another document, as your new link repeats several items and advocates for punishment in much stronger language.
--
Again, i don't know what happened and make no claims about the validity of the accusations. I'm trying to point out that this kind of witch hunt based on pre-judging someone from only an accusation should terrify you. Guilty until proven innocent is a dangerous precedent to set... even if the accused really deserves it.
You might try reading the links I provided previously. Even if Jake did the terrible things he's accused of, ignoring the principles of justice and simply judging him guilty sets a precedent where you might be judge guilty on a mere accusation in the future.