“Thinking is hard work, which is why you don’t see many people doing it.” ― Sue Grafton
A few times people have claimed “all of these posts are from the same person, Doug Spink” even when it should have been obvious that Doug was not posting anything — he’s just not allowed to.
It is clear that some education is in order to explain the support network (that is, us, and in this specific case, me) that are posting here in his digital absence. We strive to clarify the question which some might cynically phrase as “why would anyone support him?”
Personally, I want to explain why a number of us have decided to actually look at the evidence while ignoring the rumors, and support who we feel is a person far more morally sound than most of the population. Frankly, with all the anti-Doug sentiment you hear (from a few vocal people) it’s a bit of a brave thing, to think for oneself. So give me a medal.
But to get to digging for the those facts, we’ll have to first face the wild allegations before sweeping them away with any sort of alacrity.
The Usual Suspects
Doug pissed off a few people in his years. There’s no-one who’ll deny this, not even him. In some cases, he’s really proud of that. He confronts when others might paper over a blemish, he seeks to lance, to clean, to disinfect. This is contrary to how many people deal with things: Many of us prefer to be a bit more … round-about in our dealings with conflicting things. He seeks to understand — and to challenge people.
The list of those who are totally not cool with being challenged include the following:
- There is the notoriously slimy ex who wanted a free ride (somewhat literally) by stealing a valuable horse owned by a corporation she assumed was going to roll over and let that happen. That case is still before the BC courts, actually. She’ll spread many a story to try to sully a rep, playing the part of an innocent person despite quite a well documented personal legacy of crime.
- There’s more than a few self-hating zoophiles who are in the ranks. For some, it’s sort of like a twist on a Münchausen syndrome where they get off on the warm attention received from others, yet instead of getting it for bad health they get it for rolling over on other zoophiles who are “measurably worse” than they are. However that’s measured doesn’t matter, as they’ll just make shit up if there are no facts: They want to be viewed as “good zoos” because, deep down, they feel ugly and dirty. They’ll even create anti-zoo websites or collaborate with others to “bring down zoos who deserve it.”
For the next set, we’ll need to do a quick history lesson (as I remember it — I can’t really ask him because of the gag order, actually): Doug co-founded a company (now a tech incubator) called Baneki Privacy Labs which believes in free speech. Free speech was this thing they used to have before around 1995, which allowed you to say basically anything out loud you wanted to say, though you were also allowed to be ridiculed for what you say if you said dumb stuff. It was deemed too dangerous, so it was made illegal.
Anyway, throughout its history, Baneki allowed many a controversial website to buy bandwidth from their servers. This meant that Baneki, and Doug, dealt with a lot of people. Some of the people were not nice.
He ran into a few people with motives which were just wrong — such as people begging for cash to pay for server time which was actually redirected to personal expenses. He also ran into people who claimed to be into zoophilia, a concept that is supposed to be about mutual respect, who actually seemed to be more interested in harming their partners.
One thing you’ll never hear about Doug is “I wish he would speak up a bit more. I hate how he keeps quiet when he feels someone needs to be called out on an issue.” Ya, Doug has studied pre-law, he worked with doctorate-level folks, he isn’t scared to speak up when he thinks something needs to be pointed out. So he points out people caught with hands in “I haven’t eaten is weeks, so please donate to my site or the server will go down!” candy jars while they’re actually off buying hookers and blow or whatever, or he points out people who are actually on camera physically abusing partners and who are attempting to pass this off as “sexy porn.” Doug will not be quiet for that shit for a second.
Those people who are called out get really pissed off.
At least two of them have ended up “running forums” which basically means they can post stuff to many people, and anyone who disagrees can be banned. Running a forum gives you a lot of power to type out a lot of words. My personal theory is that a lot of the “everyone hates Doug!” crap that I read comes about because rumors about bad stuff come from those two people.
Plus there’s the assorted bigots, the creepily-obsessed stalkers, the non-profit fraudsters, the perjuring Gestapo-style “Humane” wingnuts, the sadly self-harming sibling… a rogue’s gallery of opportunistic creeps that certainly does nothing to support the argument that their “side” is the good guys. But they’re not our focus here – they just showed up when it looked like they could get some kicks in against someone who they thought was helpless (a tragic mistake, most are now learning). Here, we’re putting the spotlight on those who already had an ax to grind because Doug had called them out for real wrongdoing… and done it in that trademark, no-compromises style people either love or hate but never, ever forget.
It is worth noting that his writing style can be very confrontational. Doug comes off as a know-it-all, and that really grates on people. I get that.
But despite that, I have done this exercise as have an increasing number of other educated people, and I ask anyone who really wants to believe that Doug is evil to do the same, as it is an interesting experiment: Imagine for a moment that this is a trial, and you really have no idea if people are just making shit up or not. So each witness who comes to you with hearsay about Doug must produce PROOF. Watch each witness carefully: Some have powerful motives to crush him.
There’s the guy running the forum who allegedly got caught stealing. He cannot be trusted. There’s the other guy who got caught trying to out zoos for personal fame and glory. Cannot be trusted.
There’s the grow-op lady who really wants to keep the horse with her so she can over train him and try to bleed some cash out of him she can blow on coke or whatever. Can’t be trusted.
In years of looking, I have personally found no documented evidence of this evil. No abuse. No murders or maimings or dismemberments. No satanic rituals. No chewing the head off of a bat. I have only found a fairly boring and eclectic life of practicing zen and taking care of his family and helping people in need into the wee hours of the morning.
I know that all seems contrary to the spin more than a few of you have been fed, but anyone who has observed his life has seen this.
So, I guess you have a couple options. Be a sheep and just follow those people who have made up your mind for you, or do some googling and see if you can find any EVIDENCE of evil. To be clear, you cannot use allegations by police or whatever, as that is pre-trial. There is not an independent thought – an honest thought – to be found anywhere in them. Go to the trial transcripts and see what they say about him. Suddenly all the hype sounds way, way more manufactured and … boring.
It is also quite devoid of abuse.