According to the N-G, Patrick Thompson will get a new trial on the home invasion and sexual abuse charges. The story is at www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2007/04/25/champaign_man_to_get_new_trial Not too surprisingly, there's also a UCIMC discussion at www.ucimc.org/node/1143 with some predictably nasty comments about the alleged victim's "sparatic parenting," and the oh-so-clever quip: "Hos (freudian typo slip)in the hell can this be happening?" The people at the Rape Crisis Center were rather concerned, since this sort of thing could make sexual assault victims even more afraid to come forward.
Update: UCIMC has hidden the post with the "hos" joke and gratuitous information about the alleged victim's personal life. I appreciate the show of respect for the woman's privacy, and I will respect theirs by removing the IP address information that was previously posted in this thread.
Just remember that there is only so much we can say as non-witnesses to the event:
I have no idea whether a rape occurred or a framing or whatever.
What I do know is this:
1. There is a long history of CPD harassing minority youth in Champaign.
2. CPD has expressed hostility toward any sort of accountability, especially on this issue.
3. Thompson was working on this issue.
4. Anyone making assumptions about the alleged victim because of her background or lifestyle because they like or support Thompson is doing damage that goes far beyond this one particular case.
When a rape victim comes forward they are either telling the truth or they are lying. It is important to follow-up and determine in the best way possible which is the case and to do so without putting the alleged victim or the alleged perpertrator through additional suffering, as either may be the case.
Wayward,
The ameritech ip addresses are not fixed. While somebody in the past may have used one, it's not necessarily the same. Mine resets every time I refresh my router.
Posting IP addresses = usually not a good idea.
Generaly not Wenalway, but in this case they are not individual fixed addresses. They are mostly assigned to the SBC/ameritech address pool and can't be identified as specific users without access to company records.
Dolinar signed his posts so there is no harm identifying him and all he has to do to change the IP address he's tagged with is reset his modem/router.
The ameritech ip addresses are not fixed. While somebody in the past may have used one, it's not necessarily the same. Mine resets every time I refresh my router.
True - I'm not going to say that a person was definitely the poster because of the IP address. But aren't the coincidences interesting, especially since the timeframe was pretty short? There are also some interesting similarites in the general writing style. The real point, though, was that although there were a lot of posts, there isn't necessarily a large crowd trashing Thompson's alleged victim - the posts appear to come from a relatively small number of sources.
Just remember that there is only so much we can say as non-witnesses to the event:
I have no idea whether a rape occurred or a framing or whatever.
What I do know is this:
1. There is a long history of CPD harassing minority youth in Champaign.
2. CPD has expressed hostility toward any sort of accountability, especially on this issue.
3. Thompson was working on this issue.
4. Anyone making assumptions about the alleged victim because of her background or lifestyle because they like or support Thompson is doing damage that goes far beyond this one particular case.
When a rape victim comes forward they are either telling the truth or they are lying. It is important to follow-up and determine in the best way possible which is the case and to do so without putting the alleged victim or the alleged perpertrator through additional suffering, as either may be the case.
This case involved the UPD, rather than the CPD. But if the IMC people were just criticizing the police's handling of the case, that'd be OK. The big issue is the persistant nastiness directed at the alleged victim.
If you read the IMC you will note that there is actually a relatively small pool of people who speak on a regular basis. When the UI is not in session it all but shuts down.
If you read the IMC you will note that there is actually a relatively small pool of people who speak on a regular basis. When the UI is not in session it all but shuts down.
You may be right. Some more of the anonymous posts today also came from the same sources.
[redacted]
In a way, it's a relief that the worst posts seem to be coming from a small handful of people. Believing that Thompson is innocent is fine - I respect the opinions of the non-anonymous poster who said that he'd concluded this after attending the trial. What's upset me about the thread is the gratuitous nastiness - I mean, why is it necessary to make a "hos" joke when talking about an alleged sexual abuse victim? Oh, I get it - my concerns are a "hypocritical invocation of feminism" and show "shallow commitment to human rights."
Well, it's not like racists have some monopoly on sexism. Sexism is a control indoctrination in the society and often those who dismiss their own ability to be a bigot are the ones who are the most egregious offenders, regardless whether they identify as "liberal" or "conservative".
Whoever Xander is, (s)he is becoming my hero:
www.ucimc.org/node/1194&hidden=1
I'm Xander. And the fact is, the only reason I started the whole thing was as sort of a mental game. Like, "What would BD say about Silverman if Silverman was an African-American activist, rather than a lawyer?". The fact is, I was actually surprised at how easy it was.
The cases against Thompson and Silverman really aren't all that different. One person's word against another. Yet, somehow, the conclusions jumped to were completely different.
People talk about all the reasonable doubt BD brought against Thompson. And that's fair enough. But the fact is, those very same arguments work like a charm when it comes to Silverman too. ML and others just don't like it. Not really my problem, though, is it?
The REAL point, of course, is the fact that ML left up comments about Thompson's accuser being a "ho" for like half a week. Because he was too cautious and reserved to delete it before that, of course.
Yet most posts ML doesn't like last about ten minutes.
So, while it might be said that not everything on the IMC website represents the opinions of the IMC as a whole, the fact that ML has the ability to hide any posts he doesn't like certainly leads you to believe that the posts he DOES keep up are ones he endorses, right? Or am I just crazy?
But what really bugs me is the way ML pretends that the fact that Thompson's accuser gets called a "ho", and the fact that it stays up for like half a week, while most comments he doesn't like get hidden in like ten minutes, means nothing.
Sure. He can pretend that the comments of individual posters don't represent the beliefs of the IMC. So why, then, do they stay up for so long, when comments he doesn't like get deleted so fast? Does he think we're idiots or something?
So, while it might be said that not everything on the IMC website represents the opinions of the IMC as a whole, the fact that ML has the ability to hide any posts he doesn't like certainly leads you to believe that the posts he DOES keep up are ones he endorses, right? Or am I just crazy?
No, you're right on target, and that was why I decided to start extricating myself from UCIMC a few months ago. The whole problem with ML's quaint habit of hiding posts he doesn't like is that it establishes a pattern of editorial control. And once you have that, it's quite possible to hold editors responsible for the garbage that remains visible on the site. ML can howl all he wants about that being "unfair," but the truth is that you can't have it both ways. Given that I didn't 1) agree with the decision to hide some of the posts that ML had hidden or 2) approve of some of the stuff that was on display, it seemed like a good idea to get out before the unpleasant stuff really hit the fan.
But what really bugs me is the way ML pretends that the fact that Thompson's accuser gets called a "ho", and the fact that it stays up for like half a week, while most comments he doesn't like get hidden in like ten minutes, means nothing.
Sure. He can pretend that the comments of individual posters don't represent the beliefs of the IMC. So why, then, do they stay up for so long, when comments he doesn't like get deleted so fast? Does he think we're idiots or something?
Yup, amazing how that works. But the reason UCIMC is not more respected is all about how they stand up for the powerless, right? I'm sure that it has nothing to do with the blatant hypocrisy or anything like that.
ML and others just don't like it. Not really my problem, though, is it?
Another amusing factoid - until a week or so ago, UCIMC actually had their site set up so that any registered user could look at IP information for recent posts (no need to be an "editor"). That's actually how I got the IP information that had been previously posted to this thread. How, you might wonder, did UCIMC find out about this little problem? Gordy and I told them about it!
This was actually a double post. I didn't see it the first time and didn't see it get saved. So, if you're wondering why the last two comments I put up are remarkably similar, it's not because I have brain damage.
As far as standing up for the oppressed, well, there's really not that much point anymore. I mean, no matter how oppressed you are, or how much your voice is excluded from the mainstream, nobody can stop you from starting your own blog with Blogger or something. They talk about being a voice for the voiceless. A perfectly fine motivation, but honestly, there really aren't that many people out there who are really voiceless anymore. The IMC had nothing to do with it. Massive corporations like Google beat them to it.
And with a Blogger account, you really can put ANYTHING up. Not just stuff ML and BD approve of. So there's really no POINT to the IMC websites anymore. The only people now who CAN'T "be the media" are people without internet access, or, I guess, people who can't read. And people like that aren't going to get much use out of UCIMC.org anyway.
I think that's what really bugs ML. That the oppressed have turned out to be just like the rest of us, and would rather spend all day dicking around on MySpace than sitting around talking about how rotten their lives are.
In a way, he's like one of those Catholic priests right around the time of the Protestant reformation. He feels his grip on power weakening, so that just makes him more bitter and fanatic. But oh well.
"As far as standing up for the oppressed, well, there's really not that much point anymore. I mean, no matter how oppressed you are, or how much your voice is excluded from the mainstream, nobody can stop you from starting your own blog with Blogger or something. They talk about being a voice for the voiceless. A perfectly fine motivation, but honestly, there really aren't that many people out there who are really voiceless anymore. The IMC had nothing to do with it. Massive corporations like Google beat them to it.
And with a Blogger account, you really can put ANYTHING up. Not just stuff ML and BD approve of. So there's really no POINT to the IMC websites anymore. The only people now who CAN'T "be the media" are people without internet access, or, I guess, people who can't read. And people like that aren't going to get much use out of UCIMC.org anyway."
Or even on here, for that matter - it's easier to run an uncensored blog on here, with a ready-made audience, than it is on UCIMC, where they use content-based approval and disapproval.
Regardless, tools that enable users to create content freely will be the tools that succeed. UCIMC isn't freely enabling, so users aren't flocking to it. It's disappointing, as I've said before, as UCIMC has so much potential and such great resources, but they're squandering it because their admins don't trust the community of users to judge content on its own merits.
Despite the protestations of UCIMC's editors, we knuckle-draggers at IP.com are much more open and trusting of the community than they are. That must be tough to accept, but they don't seem in a hurry to change anything.
Honestly, I've been trying to make myself stop looking at the site, but the stuff with Xander was so funny that I started laughing out loud. BTW, I still want an "IP knuckle-dragger" T-shirt.
I just figured it out.
I just figured out what ML, and his relationship to the IMC, reminds me of.
Did you ever watch that show The Young Ones? In the very first episode, Rick (the activist) wants to watch this terrible show called "Nozin' Aroun'", made by Young Adults! for Young Adults!.
I really can't describe it, if you haven't seen it. Suffice it to say, it was priceless, and the show only got better from there.
But please, tell me you've seen it.
No, I know. The only thing they've got going for them is the IMC brand. People go to the IMC expecting to hear the voice of the people and whatnot.
Now, really, the whole thing is just ML and BD's personal blog. They could start up a blog called "ML and BD's Personal Blog", but they don't, because they know nobody would read it. Keeping it the way it is, they get the IMC brand loyalty.
I really don't know why the IMC as a whole doesn't do something about it. I mean, they simply CAN'T think BD and ML are doing a good job at this. Does nobody at the IMC care, or is there just nobody else willing to do the job of handling the UCIMC website?
This one?
Sweeeeeet. You, wayward, are a genius.
God, this brings back so many happy memories. If I had the time or energy (a bit hard, since I have a full-time job, unlike some people I could mention), I would love nothing more than to be the Vyvian to ML's Rick.
But what would really be the point, you know? I mean, he's got a whole nation-wide organization on his side.
Ahh, but the unholy joy. That's the great thing about that show. If you thought about it, you'd realize that Vyvian had no reason to pick on Rick. Except the simple, undefinable joie de vivre of the thing. Maybe I ought to. It's not like my life is all that exciting now.
Eh, I'm a little torn. On one hand, I understand what you're saying very well about the joie de vivre, but on the other, it'd be hypocritical for me personally to complain about the sockpuppetry on UCIMC and then start posting there under different usernames. It was pretty entertaining to watch you, though, and I was laughing out loud at some points. People near me probably thought that I was nuts. Oh wait, maybe they think that anyhow!
No, I know. I was just kidding around about tormenting him forever. I get a little carried away sometimes, particularly at two in the morning or so. This whole thing has already gotten old, and really, I'm just doing it now because I don't want him to be able to say he got the last word. Juvenile, I know, but oh well. Isn't that what they always say about why these internet discussions? They get so nasty and childish because the stakes are so low.
The Silverman thread seems to be pretty much driven into the ground, and I imagine that when that happens, Xander will return to the shadows from whence he emerged. I actually DID kind of have hopes that I could make people think around there when I first started. I don't know why. I'll probably come back onto the UCIMC in a few months to see if anything's changed. It doesn't seem to have so far, so I doubt it will.
In some ways, I agree with what IlliniPundit said about all the potential of the IMC, but in a way, I don't. I mean, even at the time it started, people were able to "be the media" completely on their own. How long has Usenet been around, like twenty years? So did it ever really have a point? That's what bugs me about it, though. All the pretensions of being the voice of the people or something. Like, gee thanks, IMC, for stepping in and freeing me from the stifling tyranny that the internet had been BEFORE you showed up. At least the Champaign one has always just been the voice of a few people, for the most part, yet they still somehow think they're representing this community. But it's not that big of a deal, really.
Anyway. Take it easy, and have fun with your new blog!
In some ways, I agree with what IlliniPundit said about all the potential of the IMC, but in a way, I don't. I mean, even at the time it started, people were able to "be the media" completely on their own. How long has Usenet been around, like twenty years? So did it ever really have a point? That's what bugs me about it, though. All the pretensions of being the voice of the people or something. Like, gee thanks, IMC, for stepping in and freeing me from the stifling tyranny that the internet had been BEFORE you showed up. At least the Champaign one has always just been the voice of a few people, for the most part, yet they still somehow think they're representing this community. But it's not that big of a deal, really.
Well, there didn't seem to be too many people posting over there, even on the Silverman thread. If you're morbidly curious, just look at the tracker pages for both UCIMC and IP and compare the rates of posts coming in. FWIW, there have been a few concerns expressed about other Indymedia sites as well.
indymediawatch.blogspot.com/
investigativeblog.net/
www.alternet.org/mediaculture/23741
Jeez. I thought I was morbidly curious, but trying to read that, honestly, made my eyes glaze over.
Don't these people understand that the death of the IMC is a good thing? That it only happened because there are so many other outlets out there, and it's just not needed anymore? Seriously, the IMC is like guys who own and maintain phone booths in a world where everyone has their own cellphone. Yeah, go ahead and talk about what a great public service you're providing. Nobody needs it, and they can do whatever they want on their OWN pages, so why worry about it?
Ah, sorry. In a nutshell, lack of accountability does not generally make for good journalism, and this is becoming apparent at a number of IMCs.