CAT: Addressing the issues, planning ahead

Category: (none)

Comments (7)

As one of the people you attacked, while using falsehoods to convict them:

As of the third paragraph you already failed in what this document needed to do. In the third paragraph you describe the first mistake you feel is worth mentioning.

This mistake you describe as roughly "we posted without letting the board review".

What *any* civilized, educated and empathetic person should recognize as the first and crucial and cruel mistake and injustice you perpetrated is not an *administrative detail*.

The first mistake you acknowledge *must* be: "We decided the punishment for some without doing any rigorous research into the evidence used or even giving them a chance to defend themselves, thus ending up libelling them and harrassing them while using and spreading *provable falsehoods*. Our actions spread *lies*."

That must be the first thing you address. Not your relationship to your board.

How much longer do you intend to fail and how far do you intend to push us before we are forced to speak out publicly in order to make you behave like adults?

> A number of people in the community have stated that the Subject received no communication from the CAT before the post on the TPF blog went live. This is not true. This is not true. The Subject was invited to a meeting

This deserves a separate response.

You originally posted these words in your first post:

> The CAT has informed the individual investigated as part investigation #1 and #2 that they are banned

At the *time of posting* you had *not* informed the Subject that he was banned. As you state yourself above you had only invited him. Thus:

Your first post lied.

To try and deflect from this is amazing and utterly and deeply disgusting and cruel in my view and you should be utterly ashamed on a personal level to try and do something like this. It is pathetic and unbecoming of any person who claims the authority involved herein.

Even if you did not intend to post a falsehood, at the very least stand by the fact that you did so.

> Other people have expressed concern that the Subject was not allowed to present a case for their defense. [...] this is not a legal process, and cannot be modeled on such processes

I am completely and utterly speechless at the temerity of typing out such words.

One last thing:

You must publicly acknowledge that your actions constituted harrassment and caused concrete and undeserved harm in many ways to the two subjects of your harrassment as well as their friends and loved ones, some of whom are even your colleagues.

If you fail to do this, then the entire concept of the CAT in itself is invalid, because a body that engages in harrassment while aiming to stamp out harrassment is a meaningless perversion of itself.

Your apologizing isn't over by far.

Not only does the link to join #tpf-cat not work, email to is bouncing!

These should both be fixed.

This isn't at all logical. If, for example, Mike Fugu or Rachel Sanma are not welcome at your conference, how can you say that this makes "all conference attendees feel welcome", since Mr. Fugu and Ms Sanma are not welcome? Surely by doing this, you have made an unsafe space for Mr Fugu and Ms Sanma where they cannot express their opinions?

I think you're trying to get away with making value judgements about people without being seen to do that.

Sign in to add comment