I find this in poor taste. You don't know Ross, or what his ACTUAL contribution was to the Silk Road, so to say "He isn't a very nice person. No one running a drug cartel really is a nice person." is incorrect, as we don't know his extent of involvement in this scenario. If you had a great concern for this case, you would follow along and see that that careless statement is actually quite damaging to public perception, which is (IMO) critical to his appeal. I find it just as abhorrent as the governments characterization of him, and while this is posted after he has already been convicted and is therefor dated, if there was an actual care for him and representing him fairly and compassionately, that part should be removed. Seems like a quick way to make a high paying post pontificating on the state of the drug war in the guise of sympathy, but not actually being sympathetic or thoughtful to how this influences a travesty of justice I personally have never seen. The comments on the drug war, fine, fair, whatever. But again, to post about Ross and try to analyze his character and motivations is cheap and borderline profiting off his loss (ahem 2180.00 and counting for this post while Ross rots in jail).
Also, based on the points that this was a harm reduction tool, can you really say he "isn't a very nice person"? Arguably, he is a hero and far nicer than the warlords of the drug war. As someone who has met Ross close to a dozen times, this is offensive. Ross is one of the most inspiring people I have ever met, and imo, is a hero. Politics of the drug war aside, this is just plain careless posting.
Perhaps it is, so what? He has the right to post whatever he wants and you can flag, as other people to and so on.
This is an anarcho-capitalist market place of text, who said that truth has to prevail?
A solution would be to donate the profit of this post to the appeal fund :)
I agree tatiana, its clear that, this is an attempt to profit off ross's misfortune. And is written in very bad taste..
Thanks, it's really sickening, and so are his excuses trying to weasel out of it. "I tried to help Ron Paul and it was cold outside!" Whoopee. Charles is not taking any responsibility for his own mischaracterizations of Ross and inaccuracies in what he's written. It's ridiculous, and factually incorrect, and timed right after Lyn made her post just to scoop up some Steemit on an obviously popular topic for self gain and not to actually shed truth onto a complicated situation or help Ross in any way.
My opinion comes from the facts presented at the trial and my readings in the media. Ross chose to work in a field that is dangerous, invites harmful characters and requires extralegal enforcement of agreements. Whether you like Ross or not, you have to concede that running criminal enterprises doesn't exactly reward being nice.
For example, if someone steals from you, then who do you call? How do you address blackmail or threats? You can't call the police, there are no contracts or courts to fall back on. You have to embrace violence or threats. This is why black markets are so harmful to society. When the government creates them, they are forcing that sector to embrace violence and antisocial behavior.
Ross's contribution was organizing a marketplace to reduce the harmful side effects of black markets. He was harshly punished by the state for it. The purpose of this article is to point out the hypocrisy of this act.
Are you going to donate the profits of this post to his appeal (you know, since you think he was so harshly punished)? You are misinformed on this trial, and Ross was NEVER able to present a proper defense. We DO NOT know his involvement, and it seems you are only presenting the government's position on this. IF you actually followed the case closely, as you should have since you make this a public post in sympathy and solidarity with Lyn, Ross, and the rest of the victims of the drug war, you would know that your statements are based on only the government's accusations (that you supposedly condemn). I think the right thing to do in the interest of justice would be to donate this post's profits to the Ulbricht family.
I think you are allowing your personal feelings for Ross to cloud your objectivity. In his plea for lenancy, he admitted his involvement in running the silk road.
Yes I have deep concerns about the case from the corruption of the agents to the parallel construction of evidence from the FBI/NSA. It's simply put a miscarrage of justice at the highest level.
This said, I take umbrage to your assertation that this article is an act of profiteering off of Ross's misfortune. It's a commentary of the hypocrisy of the state.
As for the free Ross fund, I have a great deal of empathy for Lyn and the movement, but I think it's ultimately going to be unsuccessful. Ross's case was too political and is too damaging to the state for them to reverse course. You need a presidential pardon.
You are uninformed in your assessment of his "involvement", and I again maintain that your ignorance is negligent at best. He has never said he was in charge of the silk road during it's entire time, he said he created it and that's it. This wasn't explored at any point during the trial. Your excuse that you shouldn't donate because he needs a presidential pardon from the very state that you supposedly rally against is disingenuous and very convenient for you to keep the money. You can always put it in his commissary, or to help fund Lyn's efforts to free him. You know, it's not cheap to fly around the world trying to raise awareness (for that presidential pardon you recommend to happen, people need to know about it) so even if your donation doesn't go to the appeal, surely you must agree that her expenses could use some help being covered?
Tatiana, I am not going to be bullied into giving my money to other people. Only the IRS gets to do that.