TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 96 of 96

Thread: Jeffrey Epstein, accused sex trafficker, dies by suicide

  1. #76
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2003
    Location: Location, Location
    He did that literally the day after the allegations were made. If it had been sometime before, I would believe the reasons he gave for doing it. But one day afterward? Sorry, no. Bullshit. Alec had been put in the crosshairs, and Scott didn't want to get hit with the splash.

  2. #77
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    So, what about all the other stories where absolutely nothing happened to the accused:
    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3...tions-of-abuse

    And what about all the abusers out there who continue to enjoy professional success and not face any consequences for their actions while their victims suffer in silence and even commit suicide. How is that justice? And what about future victims? From the article:

    “I am not here to ruin your life,” said Vanir. “I am here to keep you from ruining the lives of others.”
    And doesn't it make you wonder why Quinn is being singled out, that it's her story that's being questioned and having poked holes into, when other people also came forward saying they had been abused by Holowka?
    Last edited by Starker; 5th Oct 2019 at 21:13.

  3. #78
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Quote Originally Posted by Trance View Post
    He did that literally the day after the allegations were made. If it had been sometime before, I would believe the reasons he gave for doing it. But one day afterward? Sorry, no. Bullshit. Alec had been put in the crosshairs, and Scott didn't want to get hit with the splash.
    This is what Scott had to say, for the benefit of people who haven't read it. It checks off years of mental abuse and trauma while working with Alec.

    There are multiple people mentioned being in Alec's unstable orbit and his threats of suicide. It's reasonable to conclude that Scott wrote it because he no longer needed to worry about something he said being the reason for Alec taking his own life. It's also reasonable to conclude that this was also written to distance himself from Alec -- because that'd be the pragmatic thing to do. But it isn't reasonable to assume everyone, including Alec's sister, made up these issues out of whole cloth, out of thin air, and that the man was being unfairly maligned. That smacks of conspiracy with multiple agents, and while a man has taken his life, I'm going to be the dick who points out this isn't that big of a deal to be a conspiracy.

  4. #79
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    It's true that a lot of police departments have got some serious procedural problems that need fixing when it comes to following up on rape reports, but that's not a good enough reason for me to embrace mob justice and discard any need for evidence.
    Don't underestimate the degree to which a lack of faith in the justice system leads directly to vigilantism, whether you personally (not directly victimized) embrace it or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trance View Post
    He did that literally the day after the allegations were made. If it had been sometime before, I would believe the reasons he gave for doing it. But one day afterward? Sorry, no. Bullshit. Alec had been put in the crosshairs, and Scott didn't want to get hit with the splash.
    For a guy who very recently gave a little writeup about allegations without evidence, that's one helluva stretch. It's just the "leaving the party" effect: nobody wants to be first, but once the exodus begins, nobody wants to be last, either.

    Anyway, that is the principle point and value of these finally-speaking-up trends: Making it safer for everyone else to come forward with their own stories. People's behavioral patterns rarely results in isolated incidents. And I, for one, feel a lot better about believing such allegations when there's a host of witnesses - that's evidence.

    But you? Why bother even talking about evidence when you clearly can find any reason, no matter how irrelevant or made up, to dismiss all of the evidence?
    Last edited by Pyrian; 5th Oct 2019 at 14:13.

  5. #80
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Sulphur View Post
    This is what Scott had to say, for the benefit of people who haven't read it. It checks off years of mental abuse and trauma while working with Alec.
    Alec sounds like a really troubled guy. And this really puts things in a very different perspective:

    To the outside observer, this all started on a Tuesday and ended on a Saturday. But for a lot of us, it was much longer than that. This story started in 2013 for me. For some it started in 2005. Or in 2009. Or 2018.

    [...]

    After a lot of very hard thinking and checking up we announced that we had cut ties with Alec. Some folks reported this as us “firing” Alec, when there was nothing to fire him from. Infinite Fall isn’t a company. It’s a name we picked for our collaboration. There’s no Infinite Fall HQ, no salary to cut. We weren’t working on any big money-making project he’d no longer be a part of. It’s more like we broke up or something. And to be honest he’d already moved on.

    [...]

    While I praise Alec’s work, consider this- people left the industry because of what he did. People gave up their dreams, the art they wanted to make. People, drawn by the promise of working with a well known indie developer, found themselves caught between giving up their dreams and financial stability and getting away from him. People spent years with him as a destructive presence in their lives. People developed PTSD. People spent hours and money on therapy. People felt trapped by him. It’s hard for me to see how one man’s work is worth what he did to so many others.

  6. #81
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Pyrian View Post
    Don't underestimate the degree to which a lack of faith in the justice system leads directly to vigilantism, whether you personally (not directly victimized) embrace it or not.
    With No Immediate Cause
    by Ntozake Shange
    Code:
    every 3 minutes a woman is beaten
    every five minutes a
    woman is raped/every ten minutes
    a little girl is molested
    yet I rode the subway today
    I sat next to an old man who
    may have beaten his old wife
    3 minutes ago or 3 days/30 years ago
    he might have sodomized his
    daughter but I sat there
    cuz the men on the train
    might beat some young women
    later in the day or tomorrow
    I might not shut my door fast
    enough push hard enough
    every 3 minutes it happens
    some woman's innocence
    rushes to her cheeks/pours from her mouth
    like the betsy wetsy dolls have been torn
    apart/their mouths
    menses red split/every
    three minutes a shoulder
    is jammed through plaster and the oven door/
    chairs push thru the rib cage/hot water or
    boiling sperm decorate her body
    I rode the subway today
    and bought a paper from an
    east Indian man who might
    have held his old lady onto
    a hot pressing iron/I didn't know
    maybe he catches little girls in the
    parks and rips open their behinds
    with steel rods/I can not decide
    what he might have done I only
    know every 3 minutes
    every 5 minutes every 10 minutes
    I bought the paper
    looking for the announcement
    there has to be an announcement
    of the women's bodies found
    yesterday the missing little girl
    I sat in a restaurant with my
    paper looking for the announcement
    a young man served me coffee
    I wondered did he pour the boiling
    coffee on the woman because she was stupid
    did he put the infant girl in
    the coffee pot because she cried too much
    what exactly did he do with coffee
    I looked for the announcement
    the discovery of the dismembered
    woman's body
    victims have not all been
    identified today they are
    naked and dead/some refuse to
    testify one girl out of 10's not
    coherent/ I took the coffee
    and spit it up I found an
    announcement/not the woman's
    bloated body in the river floating
    not the child bleeding in the
    59th street corridor/not the baby
    broken on the floor
    
                "there is some concern
                that alleged battered women
                might start to murder their
                husbands and lovers with no
                immediate cause"
    
    I spit up I vomit I am screaming
    we all have immediate cause
    every 3 minutes
    every 5 minutes
    every 10 minutes
    every day
    women's bodies are found
    in alleys and bedrooms/at the top of the stairs
    before I ride the subway/buy a paper or drink
    coffee from your hands I must know
    have you hurt a woman today
    did you beat a woman today
    throw a child across a room are the little girl's pants in your pocket
    did you hurt a woman today
    I have to ask these obscene questions
    I must know you see
    the authorities require us to
    establish
    immediate cause
    every three minutes
    every five minutes
    every ten minutes
    every day

  7. #82
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2000
    Location: VIE, .at
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray View Post
    it's most often very difficult to figure out what he actually means
    I spoke not about details on purpose. I want to talk about the problem in general, not the particular instance (see below).

    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    Daxim is here defending Epstein
    That's incorrect. The occasion was rms being cancelled by Selam Gano and her mob, losing him his job and income and place of living.

  8. #83
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Well, once you start defending pedophilia and child sex trafficking, you're on a slippery slope, to say the least. And it seems there's no shortage of other controversies with him either.

  9. #84
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Sometimes the metoo movement is way too over-vigilant, steamrolling people for the slightest infractions. Other times, it's about dead on accurate, giving people exactly what they deserve.

    From what I've read, Stallman's ousting might be an example of the latter.

  10. #85
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2000
    Location: VIE, .at
    If you think that's what really happened, then you two are exactly what I was talking about being instrumentalised. Your media competence is astonishingly bad.

  11. #86
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Frankly there's only one conclusion to be had here between the two sides, and it's not even a contest. vi or bust.

  12. #87
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    VIM all the way, you son of a bitch.

  13. #88
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Emacs.

  14. #89
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Daxim View Post
    If you think that's what really happened, then you two are exactly what I was talking about being instrumentalised. Your media competence is astonishingly bad.
    In the instance that you speak of, he went to bat for Minsky, saying that the 17-year old girl who was directed to have sex with him was most probably "entirely willing" and he called Epstein's child sex trafficking victims (some as young as 14) his harem.

    And who am I to believe, if not my own lying eyes? The dude has a history of this (bolding mine):

    https://stallman.org/archives/2003-m...ne%202003%20()

    The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.
    https://stallman.org/archives/2006-m...cal%20party%29

    Dutch pedophiles have formed a political party to campaign for legalization.
    [Reference updated on 2018-04-25 because the old link was broken.]

    I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.
    https://stallman.org/archives/2012-j...pornography%29

    Rick Falkvinge joins me in demanding an end to the censorship of "child pornography", and points out that if in the US you observe the rape of a child, making a video or photo to use as evidence would subject you to a greater penalty than the rapist.
    https://stallman.org/archives/2012-n...8Pedophilia%29

    There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.
    As for other controversies, suffice it to say that having "knight for hot ladies" on your office door does not exactly smack of academic professionalism. And there's a host of other instances, ranging from casual sexism to the outright horrifying, from staring at his colleague's chest to saying things like he would kill himself if they didn't go out with him.

    Exactly how much of a creep do you have to be before people are allowed to call you out and stop tolerating your obnoxious behaviour?

    As far as I'm concerned, Stallman getting the boot from MIT was overdue and long deserved and Selam Gano's post where she calls him out on these things was entirely justified.
    Last edited by Starker; 8th Oct 2019 at 12:15.

  15. #90
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    I always thought that Stallman was a bit of a dick. And that his presence was more of a negative for free software than a positive. His claim that pedophilia was ok if the child was ok with it, shows that he had no fucking clue what he was talking about. (A while ago, he openly apologized for that point of view, and has expressed that he now understands why he was wrong. At least he's learning).

    This guy (Thomans Bushnell) did a good job explaining what Stallman did wrong this time.
    https://news.slashdot.org/story/19/0...chard-stallman
    He thought that Marvin Minsky was being unfairly accused. Minsky was his friend for many many years, and I think he carries a lot of affection and loyalty for his memory. But Minsky is also dead, and there's plenty of time to discuss at leisure whatever questions there may be about his culpability. RMS treated the problem as being "let's make sure we don't criticize Minsky unfairly", when the problem was actually, "how can we come to terms with a history of MIT's institutional neglect of its responsibilities toward women and its apparent complicity with Epstein's crimes". While it is true we should not treat Minsky unfairly, it was not -- and is not -- a pressing concern, and by making it his concern, RMS signaled clearly that it was much more important to him than the question of the institution's patterns of problematic coddling of bad behavior.

  16. #91
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2000
    Location: VIE, .at
    saying that the 17-year old girl who was directed to have sex with him was most probably "entirely willing"
    That is the opposite of what he actually wrote, namely he assumes Giuffre was being coerced by Epstein, E. would tell her to conceal that, and she would present herself to Minsky as entirely willing.

    I notice a link to the original sources is missing.

    The dude has a history of this
    I notice a link to the post on the same blog that abrogates the previous posts is missing.

    he called Epstein's child sex trafficking victims (some as young as 14) his harem
    What is the significance of that?

    having "knight for hot ladies" on your office door does not exactly smack of academic professionalism
    Someone else used permanent marker to write on the plastic receptacle next to the door and then took a picture of it before anyone had a chance to erase it.

    staring at his colleague's chest

    he would kill himself if they didn't go out with him
    Hearsay, not checked by journalists. All kinds of hanger-ons are coming out of the woodworks and tell tales (like he was married and worked for VA Linux) that don't hold up under the slightest investigation. Therefore I'm inclined to not believe it until further corroboration.

    But let's assume it's true. Annoying colleagues is a world apart from "defending pedophilia and child sex trafficking". That does not justify vigilante mobs. I want to live in a society where rule of law is the norm and not mobs ruining lifes.

  17. #92
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    If you think for a moment that Minsky, an old man, would have thought that a young girl is "entirely willing" in that situation, then I have nothing more to say.

    As for the incident, he was diminishing what happened to Epsteins victims in order to defend his friend. Arguing semantics, casting doubt on their testimony. And calling victims of sex trafficking a harem just shows how callous and insensitive he's about the whole thing. Remember, some of them were as young as 14.

    And as for pedophilia, how much clearer can you get than what the guy has up on his own site in his own words.

    As the saying goes, there are none as blind as those who don't want to see. There are decades of stories of Stallman being a creep. How convenient that you can dismiss it all as "hearsay". Again, I ask you, how much of a creep has a guy have to be before you are allowed to call him out on that publicly?
    Last edited by Starker; 10th Oct 2019 at 19:27.

  18. #93
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    We live in a world where a bunch of skeevy, out of touch politicians talking too much about pizza can spin up an entire mythology of child abuse, compete with flow charts, blue prints, and a guy raiding a restaurant with a gun, but some other person says something like "hey, let's fuck some kids", and suddenly we're asked to consider the surrounding circumstances, take it all in context.

    I guess it all comes down to a matter of opinion, huh? I believe that the people I don't like are all pedophiles and sneaky drips. The people I do like are, of course, being smeared by the people I don't.

  19. #94
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2000
    Location: VIE, .at
    Minsky, an old man, would have thought that a young girl is "entirely willing" in that situation
    Why would he not? It does fit the situation. I will lay it out the details AIUI, since you did not. A millionaire invites you to an island vacation to have some fun with the goal of cultivating close relationships, pays for your flight, accomodation, meals, entertainment, massages. The masseuse comes and also offers sexual services. How in anyone's mind is the most straight-forward explanation *not* "that millionaire also hired prostitutes" *but* "that millionaire abducted and forced them"? That only makes sense in hind-sight. You keep saying young girl which means four to six years of age. But Giuffre was almost adult. Don't try to pull stupid word tricks on this thread's readers.

    A witness said Minsky declined, again that information is available in the original source. Have you sought it out and read yet? If not, how often do I need to drop a hint as broad as a barn door?

    I notice you did not challenge anything of the rest I wrote. Silence betokens consent. AFAIC the accusation of "defending pedophilia and child sex trafficking" is off the table.

    he was diminishing what happened to Epsteins victims in order to defend his friend
    No, he did not write anything that diminishes. It also is not a defence, but a request towards using more concrete terms than "sexual assault" when accusing because it is too vague. (See original source.)

    how callous and insensitive he's about the whole thing
    The more charitable interpretation of that would be that he has different priorities. Well, people do, and there's nothing wrong with that. There's not a single society on the whole world that operates with common priorities.

    But let's assume he really is callous and insensitive. That is called a character weakness and does not justify vigilante mobs.

    there are none as blind as those who don't want to see [] you can dismiss it all as "hearsay"
    I'm prepared to change my mind, if that is not clear enough from my last post. Are you?

    I have two good reasons to be skeptical, namely aforementioned hanger-ons, and decades of accusations with no conviction. And it's not like he's rich and can just pay off accusers before it comes to a court case; he leads a life akin to Diogenes in the barrel.

    how much of a creep has a guy have to be before you are allowed to call him out on that publicly?
    Low threshold, I think anyone should be able call out in good faith what one wants. But that's not what happened. Mob happened.

    ----

    You really are media incompetent. The more you write, the more it is apparent.

    Step up your effort if you wanna participate in serious discussion. For Gray's sake, here's the education: You are required to take in all available information, not just those pieces that confirm your preconceived biases. Apply rationality, not the amygdala. You have to be able to entertain the thought in your mind that you could be wrong, and consider information in that light. Make arguments to topple iron men, not straw men.

  20. #95
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    You are simply conjuring the best scenario that could happen, not really applying rationality here. Might want to take some of your own advice. Even if you take the most charitable interpretation that Minsky was simply unaware of what was going on at the time, he still continued to associate with Epstein after he had been convicted as a sex offender. Not to mention prostitution is illegal in most of America, including Virgin Islands, and the girl was under the age of consent there when she was ordered to have sex with Minsky, if the timeline is correct. Also, even a 17-year-old is a young girl compared to someone in their seventies. That was what I had in mind when I said "a young girl" in that sentence, not your bad faith accusation.

    And he has definitely defended pedophilia, as I clearly showed with the quotes I pulled from his site. And those were just examples -- there's more where they came from. Also, he was certainly trying to diminish the situation of what happened with Epstein and Minsky. Calling Epstein's child victims his harem is one example of that. Arguing that it's irrelevant whether the girl was below the age of consent is another.

    As for your willingness to change your mind, I severely doubt it if you're prepared to dismiss any and all first-hand accounts as hearsay. There have been stories of Stallman acting inappropriately towards women for decades. The first of such I must have heard some 18 years ago when I was just starting in IT and in the meantime I have heard and read several more from people who have met him in conferences or in the line of work.

    Here's just one of those:

    https://twitter.com/suzanne_hillman/...96833761660928

    He flirts with anyone who is female, even if they are underage. He is creepy in person, in a way that I cannot adequately describe.
    And many people have confirmed his behaviour, including his colleagues:

    https://medium.com/@thomas.bushnell/...s-18e6a835fd84

    I was around for most of the 90s, and I can confirm the unfortunate reality that RMS’s behavior was a concern at the time, and that this protection was itself part of the problem. He was never held to account; he was himself coddled in his own lower-grade misbehavior and mistreatment of women. He made the place uncomfortable for a lot of people, and especially women.
    Your defence that he hasn't been sued and convicted in court doesn't hold water either, because not all behaviour has to be criminal in order for it to be unacceptable for workplace, especially a prestigious institution like MIT.

    As far as I'm concerned, I see (and you have offered) no reason to change my mind that Stallman is a creep who has deserved to be kicked out of MIT for a long time, because his defence of pedophilia has been public and unmistakable and the stories about Stallman having inappropriate interactions with women (which go beyond merely "annoying" them) have been remarkably consistent and long-running. The latest controversy is merely the last straw in a long line, even if we take the most charitable interpretation of what happened with Minsky.
    Last edited by Starker; 11th Oct 2019 at 10:49.

  21. #96
    Moderator
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: Wales
    Quote Originally Posted by Daxim View Post
    Silence betokens consent.
    I have struggled to keep up with the conversation (time constraints and stuff) and I don't know who's being discussed but I wonder if you could just explain this statement, which stands out to me, and the context. Is it just referring to Starker's post? I can't think that you would think it be universally applicable.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •