Bullying Via Process: Public Humiliation Disguised as Due Diligence
Elle exploited Noisebridge's good-faith meeting culture to publicly humiliate a volunteer and position herself as "on top of" work she didn't do. Noisebridge meetings welcome interjections and questions—but Elle used that trust to be rude (publicly criticizing a volunteer she has no relationship with for missing an update that didn't affect her) and to claim credit (interjecting about GoFundMe status to appear "on top of" fundraising she didn't build or run).
This is the same pattern as the Bravespace Incident: exploit community norms designed for good faith (open meetings, conflict resolution) to escalate conflict and gain advantage.
The Pattern: One person tries to complete routine designated task (Stage 1-2). The other person escalates through public criticism, weaponizing good-faith meeting norms, and ignoring explicit de-escalation requests (Stage 4-6).
Noisebridge meetings welcome interjections, questions, and additional information. This is good-faith culture—we trust people are adding value, asking genuine questions, contributing context. The Treasurer Report is Loren's time, but people can and do interject helpfully.
Elle exploited that good-faith trust:
What Elle's interjections achieved: Not useful information (she already had key numbers). What they did achieve: (1) Public humiliation of volunteer, (2) Appearing "on top of" work she didn't do, (3) 3+ hour meeting.
The real issue: Exploiting good-faith meeting culture (where interjections are welcome) to be rude to volunteers and claim credit for others' work.
Noisebridge's Tuesday meetings follow a template. The Financial Report section is explicitly designated for the treasurer to provide an update based on what they currently know:
Financial Report (first Tuesday of month only)
Anarchist societies under a capitalist state need money to survive and thrive, yo.
Monthly revenue, expenses. Big projects. Big fundraising events. Reserves in bank.
Any other details by those participating in handling our financials
The latest financial reports from the treasurer are available at https://noisebridge.net/wiki/Finances — Meeting template
This is Loren's time to report what he knows. It's not a Q&A session. It's not an accountability hearing.
After this 3+ hour weekly meeting, everyone had to stay for ANOTHER meeting to do last-minute planning for NB16. This was 3 days before the event was supposed to start. People were looking at another 2 hours of meeting time — on top of the already grueling weekly meeting.
This is why dragging out the treasurer's report was so painful: Every minute Elle spent interjecting with inactionable details (GoFundMe "slowing down," bitcoin access Loren couldn't control) was another minute people couldn't get to the urgent NB16 planning.
Why was planning happening at the last minute? Elle had failed to get people to come to her fundraising meetings, so she pushed her fundraising concerns into the weekly meeting. This was totally inappropriate — especially given that NB16's crisis was Elle's fiasco in the first place (see Event Abandonment).
Elle was holding the entire group hostage by interjecting with details designed to piss off Loren (criticizing his missing update, demanding bitcoin discussion) while everyone else needed to move on to genuinely urgent planning.
Elle began by pointing out that Loren had not provided a treasurer update the previous week. This was true — he hadn't.
Why this was rude:
What this accomplished: Framed Loren as failing in his duties, setting the stage for Elle to treat his designated report time as an accountability hearing. Public criticism of volunteer labor by someone with no relationship or authority.
During the designated Treasurer Report time, Loren provided the basic update:
This was the basic update. Then Elle interjected:
"Elle continued to interject with questions and comments about fundraising within the treasurer report, extending it from its expected 10-15 minutes to about 40 minutes, failing also to recognize when the group had already closed that topic and moved on to the next one." — nthmost, first-hand witness
The setup worked: By framing Loren's missing previous week's update as a problem (even though it didn't affect her), Elle justified treating his designated time as an interrogation. The treasurer report—meant to be a brief update—became a 40-minute accountability hearing.
At hour 2.6 of the meeting, LX raised a discussion item about financial reporting:
"in the past we had all our financial data and if the treasurer was not there then the page could answer the information. LX has updated the wiki about our information. we need to start updating the page asap and before every meeting so we can tell people accurately." — LX, line 392
Loren's response acknowledged the constraint:
After a grueling 3+ hour meeting, nthmost expressed frustration:
"Frustrated with people's lack of people's understand of boundaries of things in the template. Please stop going backwards. no back and forth. Everyone is so burnt." — nthmost, line 416
Loren added clarification about discussion item structure. Then the critical exchange:
| Speaker | Statement | Line |
|---|---|---|
| nthmost | "fundraising is something that interrupts a lot. not sure which way it goes." | 420 |
| Elle | "there is a boundary between the treasurer's report and the fundraising efforts." | 422 |
| nthmost | "Many people talked about fundraising efforts during the treasurers report." | 424 |
| Elle | "there is not time for everyone to come into this meeting to miss the items. we always want a discussion on the bitcoin." | 426 |
| nthmost | "might be a good point to make a wiki page about the finances." | 428 |
| Elle | "no more talking about bitcoin." | 430 |
Notice the whiplash:
So there's a boundary... except when Elle wants to discuss bitcoin during the treasurer's report? Then after demanding the discussion, she shuts it down?
The Coinbase/bitcoin access problems were a known issue that had been very difficult and very stressful for Loren for the entire year. Elle wasn't learning about this for the first time — she already knew:
This makes the interrogation even more cruel: Elle demanded "discussion on the bitcoin" knowing it was a painful, year-long problem Loren couldn't solve. This wasn't about getting information — it was about forcing Loren to publicly explain a known, stressful failure while everyone watched.
On December 10, 2025 at 19:37 UTC, Elle posted to #general:
"How can we not have meetings like last night ever again? Can we shift non time sensitive things to the next meeting? Can we put time sensitive things seeking volunteers and other support to early in the meeting and not the 3rd hour (10pm)?" — Elle, December 10, 2025, 19:37 UTC [archived]
"a near full night's sleep and am still exhausted." — Elle, 19:38 UTC [archived]
Elle complains about being exhausted after the meeting — but she's the one who dragged it out.
Remember: After the 3+ hour weekly meeting that Elle extended with her treasurer interrogation, everyone had to stay for another 2 hours to do last-minute NB16 planning (3 days before the event). NB16 was Elle's fiasco — she had failed to get people to come to her fundraising meetings, which is why planning was happening at the last minute in the first place.
Elle caused both problems:
Then she complains about being exhausted by the meetings she made longer, dealing with the crisis she created.
Elle asks "how can we not have meetings like that ever again" but doesn't acknowledge:
She frames herself as a victim of the long meeting, not a contributor to its length.
Throughout the Discord conversation, nthmost made comments that were obliquely directed at Elle — without naming her:
"I felt like there was some serious inability for people to just let go of adding 'one more thing', and as someone who has moderated meetings spread over many eras of Noisebridge, I feel this has become an exceptional trend right now" — nthmost, 20:19 UTC [archived]
Translation: Elle kept adding "one more thing" to the treasurer's report.
"There shouldn't be a need to be dictatorial. If ppl are popping in and trying to redirect a lot, then they're not getting their needs met outside of the meeting." — nthmost, 20:19 UTC [archived]
Translation: Elle's fundraising questions should be handled outside the meeting, not during Loren's report time.
"Yes. I was kind of aghast at the general inability of people to cocreate with the group (and with me as moderator) ways to 'take this offline'" — nthmost, 20:21 UTC [archived]
Translation: When the moderator tried to move Elle's questions offline, she wouldn't cooperate.
"I feel strongly a clash of values in meetings right now. Perhaps we should start by articulating the point of general meetings." — nthmost, 20:25 UTC [archived]
Translation: Elle's use of meeting time doesn't align with the meeting's purpose.
"Proposal: what if we did reddit style voting on agenda items 24 hours before meeting and it goes in order of that?" — chineseman, 21:25 UTC [archived]
"that doesn't address the actual problems of that meeting." — nthmost, 21:39 UTC [archived]
Translation: The problem isn't the meeting structure. It's specific people misusing the structure.
Meanwhile, LX — who also contributed to the meeting length — took accountability:
"And I apologize on insisting on the 'one more thing' at the end but it was in the spirit of 'let's not make finances take as long in future by restoring the Old Ways' of financial reports being on the finances page before meetings" — LX, 22:20 UTC [archived]
nthmost's response:
"that was kind of a 'read the room' moment unfortunately. which was hard to do over jitsi perhaps." — nthmost, 22:24 UTC [archived]
Note: LX acknowledged his contribution to the problem. Elle did not.
Elle claimed she needed financial information for fundraising efforts. But:
The information Elle demanded wouldn't help her fundraising work — and she already knew the answers.
What Elle's interrogation did accomplish:
When called out:
If Elle genuinely needed financial information for fundraising coordination, she could have:
But Elle already knew the answers. The Coinbase/bitcoin access issues were a known problem that had been very difficult and stressful for Loren all year. She wasn't seeking information — she was forcing Loren to publicly defend a year-long failure everyone already knew about.
She used public meeting time to interrogate someone who:
The pattern:
Loren is a volunteer. He's the treasurer because someone has to be. Public interrogation about administrative blockers he can't control:
This creates a chilling effect:
LX also contributed to the meeting's length with a "one more thing" moment. But notice the difference:
| LX's Behavior | Elle's Behavior |
|---|---|
| Acknowledged: "I apologize on insisting on the 'one more thing'" | Asked: "How can we not have meetings like that ever again?" |
| Explained motivation: "let's not make finances take as long in future" | Claimed: "there is a boundary" while demanding bitcoin discussion |
| Accepted feedback: "that was kind of a 'read the room' moment" | Shut down conversation: "no more talking about bitcoin" |
| Took accountability for impact | Deflected accountability onto meeting structure |
Both contributed to a long meeting. Only one took responsibility.