I don't think that it is necessarily fair to be extremely critical of Kickstarter. I think that we should consider the viewpoint of the respondent to her, he probably thinks that she in some way caused the stalker to spam her project. I agree 100% that this problem should be fixed - but I don't think that Kickstarter would intentionally ban her account for this situation if they had the full story, and now that it has come to light I hope that apologies are made and this situation is corrected.
he probably thinks that she in some way caused the stalker to spam her project.
No matter what happened here, this entire concept is horribly, horribly wrong. It's blaming the victim -- saying that it's somehow her fault for "causing" the stalker to do something... as opposed to the stalker's fault, for stalking.
Except that Forrest's point is that they probably didn't know the spammer was a stalker. This is kind of relevant. If a random person walks up to you and asks if you've seen this person and shows you a picture, you'd probably help them out, completely unaware they're a serial killer. That doesn't make you a bad person.
If Kickstarter does respond to this by maintaining their stance, then there's a huge problem. Until then, it's more a case of an incompetent employee.
I don't think that changes anything? Again, replace the word "stalk" with "spam": it's the spammer's fault for spamming, not her fault for hypothetically "causing" the spammer to make the decision to spam her.
I was in no way saying that it was the victim's fault. I just don't think that Kickstarter should be on the receiving end of a lot of criticism until we get the full story from them. It may very well be that they are under the impression that that it is her fault, although I am not saying it is, it is just plausible and would account for their reaction to her ban.