[dependenttypes]

I actually had https://blog.cr.yp.to/20160607-dueprocess.html in mind when mentioning political beliefs, but even then I think that this still falls under the "political belief" label - the belief that anyone accused of rape should not have any form of defence. Anyway, the person who is being sued was part of a harassment campaign against multiple people, including Bernstein himself, so I can't see why it would be a bad thing for him to send his declaration.

For anyone interested, his declaration is here: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.340308...

And here is the most objective and complete story of the Appelbaum events that I have personally seen so far https://github.com/Enegnei/JacobAppelbaumLeavesTor/blob/mast... (if anyone has anything better please do let me know)

> accused of sexual abuse by multiple victims

Including false accusations by others in the name of the so called victims. Such as the "Alice" case. (if I am not mistaken this specific accusation was published by the person being sued themselves)

[sneak]

People can be onboard 100% with his argument for due process (I am) and simultaneously 100% against his association with Jake Appelbaum, whose (perhaps subcriminal) misbehavior was widely reported in private in our industry prior to the bevy of as-yet-unproven rape accusations.

Appelbaum is and has been a scumbag regardless of the fact of whether or not he has been adjudicated a rapist in a court of law.

People who associate with scumbags (and, indeed, defend them in particular) aren’t great, and can and should be subject to criticism for their choices regarding scumbags.

Fortunately, it isn’t a simple dichotomy. I agree with due process for imprisoning people. I also agree in public criticism of entirely legal misbehavior and freedom of association. I don’t respect people who defend scumbags socially (defending subcriminal scumbags from prison is another matter), and djb is certainly that.

[dependenttypes]

> Appelbaum is and has been a scumbag

I do not know him, do you? Most accusations against him that I have seen have been either by the person being sued or some form of hearsay.

It is not too unlikely that he is a scumbag to be honest, but it is still something that I do not know.

> and, indeed, defend them in particular

I contest this claim. He did not defend Appelbaum in this instance, in his declaration even he claims that he is unaware whether Appelbaum is a rapist. The lawsuit is against Lovecruft specifically. Regardless, I do not believe that scumbags do not deserve to be defended. Everyone does, as long as the defence has reasonable points that is.

Btw, can't this post of yours be interpreted as defending Lovecruft if we follow this logic? If so I find this ironic that you try to criticize Bernstein of something that you are doing yourself.

> I also agree in public criticism of entirely legal misbehavior

You must love sites like Kiwifarms then. It is one thing to have open criticism and debate and another to have dog-piling and harassment based on roumors - the ability to defend yourself and have others defend you is one of the most important things that distinguishes the two.

> and freedom of association

Do you also believe that people should be free to refuse to deal with minorities by any chance? This is something that is implied by the freedom of association after all.

> I don’t respect people who defend scumbags socially

Again, the pot calling the kettle black. I do not get this logic to be honest, I will explain why with an example. Let's take a scambag, Jeff Bezos for example, and I start saying that he is a murderer out of nowhere. Is nobody allowed to defend him or ask for evidence just because he is a scambag?