Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Dustin Lau
1,041 followers
1,041 followers
About
Dustin's interests
View all
Dustin's posts

Post has shared content
Today Orlando's ingress community came together to honor those victim to the Pulse nightclub massacre. We want to show that we do have a pulse and that we are strong in light of the tragedy our community has suffered. We want to thank all those who participated and show the world we are not defeated and we will remain Orlando Strong. Sitrep will follow shortly. #ingress   #showmeyourscanner   #orlandostrong   #ingressfieldart  +Linda B +Andrew Krug +Tina J 
Animated Photo
Animated Photo
2016-06-18
2 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
https://plus.google.com/u/0/102630108171162208446/posts/QFkUxTMsU9m

"Having seen Dong’s announcement on the Ingress Korea G+ community he moderates, I became concerned that secondary victimization might have taken place during its writing and by the post itself.
(I say the following as an Ingress player sensitive to human rights, not as a POC of the Korean Resistance. I ask all readers to understand this and hope my motives are not questioned.)


Recalling the traumatic events causes some victims of sexual crimes to suffer. Others fall into a pattern of self blame and wonder if they really did ‘ask for it.’ Therefore, demanding that victims provide unnecessary additional testimory despite the circumstances of the crime being clear, or suggesting that victims admit that they themselves were also at fault, is classified as secondary victimization.

If victims must be questioned in order to decide whether or not to ban someone from a community, all that needs to be confirmed is if the reported details are true, and if the reasons given are enough to ban that person. In this case, it is already clear that the accused is guilty. The accusations that he admits to be true are enough to ban him. If the veracity of some of the claims can’t be confirmed, that is all that needs to be said, and those may be excluded from the grounds for banning.

That is the limit of what can be done as community moderator. Going a step further by deciding that a victim didn’t suffer a crime or leading a victim to admit that they were also at fault, then announcing it to the community, is unrelated to the nature of this case and can be perceived as secondary victimization.

Whether or not an action is a crime is not for a moderator to decide. You do not have the right to use your position as owner of a community to further interrogate a victim. If you are banning the accused to protect his victims from him and prevent him from assaulting others, there shouldn’t be more harm done while carrying the sentence out. Please make everyone aware why this announcement is problematic, and make sure that no more secondary damage takes place."

Post has shared content
+Niantic Project +John Hanke +NIA Ops +Andrew Krug 
+Haerang Dong 

A community moderator has no place interrogating underaged victims of sexual assault and publishing those "findings".

They are meant to police the community, not act like they are the police.

English below.
+Haerang Dong 님께서 IK에 올리신 공지를 보니 작성 과정에서, 그리고 이 공지 자체로 2차 피해가 발생할 가능성이 느껴져 글을 올립니다.
(저는 POC라는 위치와는 전혀 별개로, 인권 감수성에 관심 있는 하나의 인그레스 유저로서 발언하는 것이니 글을 읽으시는 모든 분들의 양해를 부탁드리고 오해 없으시길 바랍니다.)


성범죄의 피해자 가운데는 사건 당시를 떠올리는 것만으로도 고통을 받기도 하고, 자신의 귀책 사유가 있지는 않은지 끊임없이 자책하는 경우도 있습니다. 따라서 가해 사실이 명백함에도 피해자에게 불필요한 추가 진술을 요구하거나, 자신의 잘못을 인정하도록 종용하는 것은 2차 가해로 간주하고 있습니다.

강퇴조치 여부를 결정하기 위해 커뮤니티 관리자로서 피해자들에게 질문을 해야 한다면, 신고 내용이 사실이고 강퇴하기 충분한 사유인지만 확인하면 됩니다. 이번 사건에서 가해자로 지목된 사람이 잘못을 저질렀음은 이미 확실하고, 가해자 스스로 인정한 부분만으로도 충분한 강퇴사유가 됩니다. 혹시 일부 내용의 사실 여부를 확인할 수 없다면 그것은 강퇴 사유에서 제외하고, "확인할 수 없다"고 밝히면 됩니다.

커뮤니티 관리자로서 하실 수 있는 일은 여기까지 입니다. 이보다 더 나아가 가해자에 대한 강퇴 조치를 공지하면서 피해 사실이 범죄가 아니라고 판단하거나, 피해자가 자신도 잘못이 있다고 인정하도록 유도하고 이를 공표하는 것은 사건의 본질과 무관하며, 피해자에게는 2차 가해로 받아들여질 수 있습니다.

범죄의 성립 여부는 커뮤니티 관리자가 판단할 일이 아닙니다. 동해랑님에게 운영자라는 위치를 이용하여 피해자를 따로 심문할 권리는 없습니다. 적어도 피해자를 보호하고, 추후 또다른 피해자가 발생하는 일을 방지하기 위해 강퇴 조치를 하시는 것이라면, 처리 과정에서 또다른 피해가 발생해서는 안 됩니다. 해당 공지의 문제점을 모두가 인식하고 피해자에 대한 2차 가해가 더 이상 발생하지 않도록 해주시길 바랍니다.

---
Recently, a respected member of many Korean Ingress communities was accused of being a sexual predator who had molested and preyed upon female members of his faction, some less than half his age, while meeting them in an Ingress-related context such as farms and BAF ops. This agent admitted partial guilt to the accusations against him and was banned from one community. The moderator of another Korean community, Haerang Dong, conducted his own investigation before also banning the accused.

Having seen Dong’s announcement on the Ingress Korea G+ community he moderates, I became concerned that secondary victimization might have taken place during its writing and by the post itself.
(I say the following as an Ingress player sensitive to human rights, not as a POC of the Korean Resistance. I ask all readers to understand this and hope my motives are not questioned.)


Recalling the traumatic events causes some victims of sexual crimes to suffer. Others fall into a pattern of self blame and wonder if they really did ‘ask for it.’ Therefore, demanding that victims provide unnecessary additional testimory despite the circumstances of the crime being clear, or suggesting that victims admit that they themselves were also at fault, is classified as secondary victimization.

If victims must be questioned in order to decide whether or not to ban someone from a community, all that needs to be confirmed is if the reported details are true, and if the reasons given are enough to ban that person. In this case, it is already clear that the accused is guilty. The accusations that he admits to be true are enough to ban him. If the veracity of some of the claims can’t be confirmed, that is all that needs to be said, and those may be excluded from the grounds for banning.

That is the limit of what can be done as community moderator. Going a step further by deciding that a victim didn’t suffer a crime or leading a victim to admit that they were also at fault, then announcing it to the community, is unrelated to the nature of this case and can be perceived as secondary victimization.

Whether or not an action is a crime is not for a moderator to decide. You do not have the right to use your position as owner of a community to further interrogate a victim. If you are banning the accused to protect his victims from him and prevent him from assaulting others, there shouldn’t be more harm done while carrying the sentence out. Please make everyone aware why this announcement is problematic, and make sure that no more secondary damage takes place.


The following text is the translation of the announcement Haerang Dong made. The original can be seen at the following link: https://plus.google.com/+DongHaeRang/posts/5grpa7mFa91

=====
Notice: Hello, this is DongHaerang. The following text is about measures taken to ban a member from our community, Ingress Korea. Thus, this announcement has nothing to do with my position as a Niantic employee, but is about me as a community owner.

Recently, a scandalous incident surfaced here. For the past two days, I called everyone involved in this case one-on-one to check facts, hear opinions and arguments until we reached a conclusion with everyone’s approval.
I’m not a judge and have no legal authority to make a judgment. Furthermore, G+ profiles are closely related to overall activities even outside this community, so to protect the privacy of those involved, please understand I only can speak of the results without any details.

Conclusion of victim A’s claims
The accused admitted that his actions can be a crime, as claimed.
Conclusion of victim B’s claims
B admitted that the behavior of the accused cannot be a crime.
Conclusion of victim C’s claims
C admitted that C’s behavior may constitute a crime against the accused, and the behavior of the accused cannot be a crime.
Conclusion of victim D’s claims
The accused admitted that his actions can be a crime, as claimed.

Following the investigation above, Ingress Korea bans the accused.

Post has shared content

Post has shared content
+Haerang Dong  Congrats! This is Enlightened L16 agent StarVoyager from China. May I ask you a question about your famous http://top.ingress.kr ? Some local agent here +Leon Zhao  have concern that you violated ToS to steal confidential profile data from agents.

According to the public post in wechat channel: http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MzA3NTc3Njk5Nw==&mid=2651692136&idx=4&sn=3b851a14a161b65a11760dc6103d1b76&scene=0#wechat_redirect, they've already confirmed with a few agents, and these agents claimed they never expose their profile data to you.

We 100% trust you, but this is the China Resistance POC who raise the concern, so would you mind explain this a little bit and fill us in with some implementation details?

Thank you so much.

Post has shared content
It was an amazing anomaly for sure

Post has attachment

Post has shared content
Mission Day for Agents with Disabilities

#AccessibleIngress   #MissionDayforAll   #EquityvsEquality   

Summary:

As an Ingress Agent with a disability, and having spoken to many other Agents with disabilities, we feel that it would be helpful if the Mission Day requirement for Agents with Disabilities was lowered so that Disabled Agents would be as likely to earn a badge as able-bodied Agents, and would not feel excluded on the basis of their disability. While setting an exact number as the lower threshold might not be helpful, the aim should be to show that they have put in time and effort and tried their best, within the bounds of their limitations (and everyone is the best judge of their own limitations, and will push themselves sensibly). This would make Ingress and Mission Day fairer, and the list of those who receive this dispensation could be easily found from the rosters of the Disabled/Accessibility teams of both Factions. This would enable Agents with Disabilities to feel as though they are not excluded from receiving Mission Day badges based on their disabilities.

+Nia Ops +NIA Ops +John Hanke +Anne Beuttenmüller +Matilde Tusberti +Andrew Krug 

My Background:

My name is Catherine, aka Agent R1SEN, and I have Osteogenesis Imperfecta, also known as Brittle Bones. I’ve broken about 40 bones so far in my life, including my right femur (thigh bone) about 12 times. This means that I mainly use a wheelchair to get around, especially for Ingress. Because I move slowly, I mainly contribute to the Resistance team by doing Intel, and I’ve been on the Intel team for a dozen anomalies and countless fielding ops. I enjoy helping to teach Intel to new Agents . I am also involved in many swag communities - I like to collect as much swag and scanner badges as possible. 

Occasionally, I treat myself to actually attending anomalies, even though I was initially very worried about slowing my team down. I have been put in car teams and been Team Leader of disabled teams at two anomalies, and will be team leader of the Vienna accessibility team. I know that the way my disability affects me means that I will never be able to do the GoRuck events (although I know some disabled people can). However, I really love doing missions - I created several in Cambridge for the individual Colleges. Banner missions are hard for me, though, because I move so much more slowly than everyone else (I have to wheel, stop, take out phone, interact, put phone back, start wheeling again). I really wanted the Mission Day badge, and asked during the lead-up to the Dublin Mission Day if it would be possible for the requirements to be lowered for disabled Agents, but received no reply. 

In the lead-up to Vienna, I discussed the Mission Day with the rest of the accessibility team, which includes people of all types of disability and impairment. They all have similar worries to mine, although one Agent HAS got the Mission Day badge already - she woke up at 6am on the day, and was one of the last to arrive back to get her badge. She showed true dedication, but the rest are worried about whether we could manage such a thing too. I see that the requirement for Vienna is 12 missions, but the day after the hectic nature of the anomaly, we will all be in pain and tired. I was wondering if this requirement could be lowered for Agents with disabilities - not necessarily to a specific number (it is so hard to judge these things, and every disabled person’s disability affects them differently) - but perhaps to reflect exactly what you are trying to do - show that someone has spent time and effort trying to do as many missions as they are able to do in the time required. As there are designated disability/accessibility teams for the Anomaly, it should not be hard to set membership of one as the requirement for any dispensation. This can be checked with the local faction organisation team.

Reasoning:

Disabilities come in all shapes and sizes. Everyone’s disability affects them in different ways, and everyone has different coping strategies. One wheelchair user might move more quickly than someone on crutches, while another wheelchair user might need to be pushed by a carer or personal assistant. Not all disabilities are visible, and some influence how much energy an individual may have (for examples of this, see Spoon Theory). Some people experience “flare ups” which mean that the amount that their disability affects them can vary from day-to-day or hour-to-hour.
 
I have been Team Lead for two disabled Anomaly teams, and from experience I have learned that the team takes much longer to get places than other teams. In fact, both times we needed to use taxis to get the team of 10-15 people between some clusters. Everything takes longer when you are disabled, not just moving places. For example, take a simple hacking mission. If you are able-bodied and walking at an average pace, you keep your phone out, and hack while walking. If you are a wheelchair user, you need to wheel to roughly the right place to be in range of the portal, take your phone out, check you are in the right place (and move if you are not), do your hack, put your phone back somewhere safe that it won’t fall off your lap or out of your pocket while you move, judge the distance to the next portal, and then move on. Doing a simple ten-minute walk hack-only mission takes 3-5 times as long for a wheelchair user. The human body was not designed to propel itself via its upper body, and most cities are not designed with wheelchair users in mind, so often you need to make detours, go uphill (where stopping to hack is a very precarious operation), and try to find a way to get in range of an inaccessible portal. All of this takes time. If someone does not require a wheelchair, they may experience similar problems, and need to take regular rest breaks due to fatigue. Other people have coordination issues which make performing tasks in-scanner take longer. Nevertheless, I am very proud of the teams I have led. It  is also worth noting that it costs more to be disabled, and to find appropriate transport and accommodation. The dedication to the game and the Faction which I have seen in players with disabilities is truly impressive, and I feel that Agents with disabilities deserve to feel as included as possible. While we may not (with rare very visible exceptions) be able to gain the Obsidian Elite or GoRuck medals, it should be possible for us to get Mission Day medals.
 
Most people are incredibly accommodating to people with disabilities, and when they are not it is almost always due to the fact that they have not even thought about the subject. As a wheelchair user, I once accidentally guided a blind friend directly into an overhead tree branch purely because I did not see it as an issue – but because he was over 6 foot tall, it was for him. My faction are very inclusive, and try their best to help me whenever possible, but I also want to be independent, so I do not want to have someone else push me in my wheelchair, and at times in the past I have been seriously injured when others have tried to help by pushing me. Not everyone with a disability can be helped along by their team.
 
When the Mission Day in Ireland was announced, I asked on the event page whether it would be possible to have the requirements lowered for those with disabilities – so that I could still do some missions, but have a lower goal to even the playing field. Unfortunately, well-meaning people suggested I get someone else to push me, or held up examples of other wheelchair users who were capable of meeting the requirements – but as already stated, nothing is a one-size-fits-all solution (There was no reply from anyone “official”). I do not want the badge for free – I am proud of my hard earned badges and my trekker stat (even if wheelchair travel doesn’t register very well). I want to do missions on Mission Day. I just do not want to have to follow the example of one of my disabled friends and start doing missions at 6am in order to get them done in time. I want to have a level playing field, but one which recognises that not everyone starts from the same position. Mission Days which take place the day after an Anomaly are even harder because people with disabilities will already be very fatigued due to the large amount of energy expended the previous day. As doing missions is often a group event, there is reluctance to take part because of fears of slowing everyone else down, and being a burden to the team, or being left behind everyone else as they race ahead.
 
Most people with disabilities know their own limits, and while they know that an anomaly weekend will take them to those limits, they will be unlikely to push themselves past those limits just for a badge - meaning that they will miss out due to their disability. There is a disabled team at most anomalies, and therefore I suggest that members of that team are given a special dispensation to not have to meet the full “normal” requirements in order to get the badge, but instead meet the requirement that they have participated and tried their hardest to complete as many missions as they physically can, even if that number is lower than “normal”. Many of the Agents with disabilities I have spoken with have very high mission stats, and are among the highest ranked Agents in their countries - we put in a lot of effort, but it just takes us longer. While we were writing this document, Ingress made a new announcement on G+ about tiered Mission Day medals, which makes the issue even more relevant.  Tiered medals create extra pressure to push yourself not just once, but on multiple occasions. Making adjustments for Agents with disabilities would help make Mission Day more inclusive, and reflect their effort and commitment.
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
2016-03-30
4 Photos - View album

Post has shared content
If you decide to fake your location to "travel" overseas, and real agents inform us about you, don't whine about getting caught. You didn't get suspended for being reported; you got suspended for cheating, plain and simple.
#ingress   #cheatingneverpays   #youhaditcoming   #biteme  

Who else has had the bootloop problem where the G4 is stuck in the LG splash screen perpetually?

Sometime it makes it out of the screen & you see the apps optimising message, then it goes back into bootloop
Wait while more posts are being loaded