Something scarily similar happened to a CS friend of mine in Japan a month ago (unfortunately, the Japanese police is a lot less sympathetic to rape claims without physical evidence and a rapist willingly hosted by the victim)… All along, CS’s response has been covering the spectrum from criminally negligent to comically incompetent (not managing to notice that a single guy sent gazilions of unsolicited message to young female users, deleted his profile, *twice*, after getting very negative reviews etc). I already had a pretty low opinion of CS after the announcement of their move to corporation (guess I was quite naive until that point), but with this, they sunk to new lows…

Rape is a massive issue for couchsurfers…..BOTH MALE AND FEMALE! It seems that guys on couchsurfing think they’re safe from this particular danger – absolute naivety – guys, your just as vulnerable if not more as you don’t pick up on subtle bad signs like most girls are used to doing. Couchsurfing.com is a god send for sexual predators.

The verification process must be improved. If need be by running background checks on new members where possible and at the very least requiring documentation to be sent to a central office which would allow for the manual verification that the person by name x that looks like picture x lives at address z. If couchsurfer turns up at the address and the host does not look like the picture and/or cannot provide ID, then they know to walk away.
The references system needs to be improved also, as at present it can be easily duped by using Mechanical Turk for example….and frankly, ‘trust’ and ‘positive’ references are given away so freely they mean nothing (you trust someone after meeting them once on a CS meetup, eh?)

Finally, I think the Couchsurfing Leaders need to bring safety to the absolute forefront of everything they do. They should make surfers aware to protect themselves at all times and do this as a top level message of the website – I’m talking, next to the logo if need be!

I am a man and my particular incident involved being drugged in my food and then attacked in a paralyzed state……The worse thing is the memories don’t come back for a day or two with some of these substances….by which time I’d moved on.

I had no idea about drug rape (and thought raoe was a female issue) before this happened. Couchsurfing need to make their young and naive members aware of the possible dangers up front and at the very least give them all of the knowledge they need to protect themselves and also to make an informed decision about joining in the first place. COUCHSURFING INVOLVES A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF RISK! This needs to be the disclaimer they offer at all times with explanation and advice.

Trust me, rape and drug rape (or even drugging with prescription drugs and/or with alcohol for that matter, whereby the host misleads the person taking it about the strength) is more commonplace and widespread than you think. By chance, in a more vulnerable mental state, I let slip a comment to a couchsurfer girl from a different country a while ago, only to hear her relay a similar story to mine.

I really WISH an investigative journalist would pick this particular issue up and go after it aggressively and thoroughly. Its too painful for me to it, or I would.

Thanks, that’s all I’ve got to say about it. Won’t be responding to any comments.

he(Kc) admitted that MB( General Manager of CS) marked the reference I left gadget as inappropriate, not once, but twice. That is not 3t’s job. That is the job of the MDST.

This means the mdst were just pawns in the hands of the elite inner circle?

And what is the big deal about CS and its LT? I couldn’t figure out what in the world was going on by reading the “mission statement” of OCS except maybe somebody wanted to have a say in something and didn’t get to. Waaah.

Leave it the hell alone if you don’t like it. Make your own hospitality network. Virtual government idealists and socialist “everybody gets a say” crybabies spend your energy on something else please.

perpetrator says
I did not make a sexual advance towards Donna. However, I recognize that my actions were interpreted in a way that was not intended, and I apologize for my behavior.

When a site administrator group warns a user not to speak out against sexual harassment it becomes scary very very scary .

Say no to violence against woman.

I agree with gadget the cs ambassadors in india have made couchsurfing lose a lot of respect by abusing the rules and lying to the member of the group they moderate.

It is sad that woman who couch surf in india have no safety net and no one to turn to as the latest example shows the people who were their hosts turned on them and the hosts and the other couch surfing friends are the ones who have not supported their couchsurfing guest in their time of need instead these host and friend have gone on the local groups and brainstorm assassinating her character.

If this is the case woman need to be really really cautions of interacting with indian couchsurfing. It looks like the poster is says anyone one can go down to the police station and look at the complaint .

What is even more worrying is the last line “victim would cringe if she knew what the police thought about her story” .
What did the police think of the her complaint and her?

1) to gain the trust of the alleged victim to keep every thing under warps
2) felt there alleged perpetrator was guilty? (does not seem to be the case in the way the alleged perpetrator is being defended)
3) Felt that the alleged victim has a genuine grievance to take her to the police station to file a police report ?

Of course, such behaviour probably does not come as any surprises to the readers of this blog:

http://bitchmagazine.org/post/is-couchsurfingorg-safe-for-women

where JBP has been obsessively posting, and where he was recently criticised for attempted to intimidate a woman who dared to disagree with him by using the same patronising tone he uses in this blog.

So JBP, would you care to explain why you felt the need to post under three different aliases (JBP, Amused, We are not amused) in order to create the impression there was more support for your “it is ok to use the suffering of a rape victim to generate more verification income for CS” position? Would you care to explain why you referred to “We are not amused” in the third person to create the impression you were seperate posters, when you later admitted you were the same person? Would you care to explain why you intentionally misrepresented my comments, claiming that I had stated that CS allowed the profile to remain after a police report when no such comment exists anywhere on this blog? Would you care to explain why you attempted to misrepresent the comments “It’s a recognised forum for finding accommodation. There is nothing disreputable about it.” as being high praise for CS?

Eagerly awaiting your next attempt to avoid answering the questions,

Hmmm … (who does not need to post under multiple names to support her arguments)

Posted August 14th, 2009 – 4:06 by Crystal Murphy from Birmingham, United States
Hello!

It seems you guys have a lot of questions about this incident, I would like to clear up a few things!

….

Secondly, to satisfy your curiosity, the alleged attacker had no references/friends, vouching, or verification. He also did not have a very filled out profile….

Crystal Murphy
CouchSurfing Public Relations

*************

Since the CS groups/forums don’t have a search function, this post was not that easy to find. Since the post was made on the day after I posed the question, I am wondering whether it was made in indirect response. (Although I imagine a lot of other people were asking the same).

Next question: Was this same information, that the alleged rapist was not verified, made available by CS to before August 14? And if so, where?

Thank you for admitting that you are willing to post under a variety of aliases to attempt to deceive people into believing that more supports actually exists for your “It is ok to use the suffering of a rape victim to generate more revenue for Couchsurfing” position. I note that you referred to “We are not amused” in the third position, in another pathetic attempt to convince people you were seperate individuals.

I think given the similarities in writing styles, it is also obvious to all that you have been posting as “Amused” as well – So in fact, your grand gesture of leaving the site in “disgust” was a pathetic sham, as you immediately returned to post as Jean-Baptiste P.

I am eagerly awaiting your next snide one sentence attempt to “furiously and indignantly refuse” to answer any of the questions directed your way, JBP. Perhaps you could create another pseudonym to attempt to deceive people into believing there is actual support for your belief that rape is “amusing” and acceptable to use as a means of generating additional income for couchsurfing.

Sorry, to disappoint you again. I posted the comment under “We are not amused.”

So once someone calls you on the inappropriateness of using the phrase “amused” to discuss the rape of a couchsurfer, your immediate response is to cry and run away? How very brave of you. I guess discussing rape is only “amusing” when no one calls you on the utter insensitivity of your “amusement”.

@Jean-Baptiste P

And once again, you display your obvious contempt for the intelligence of readers of this blog. It is obvious that “Amused” and “We are not amused” are the same poster, given the question they both pose is identically worded, and that the new username was simply a weak-kneed response to the initial criticism of his original user name “Amused”. Yet, you attempt to portray them as two seperate users in a rather pathetic attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that it is you who has continued to avoid responding to questions directed specifically to you. I will repost them again:

“What information do you have to support the statement (actually your insinuation) that Couch Surfing allowed the profile to remain on the site for months after a police report?”

Nice deliberate misrepresentation of my comment, JB! Where exactly did you see me state that CS allowed the profile to remain after a police report? I stated that CS allowed the profile to remain, even though the victim reported the incident to the MDST months ago. CS’s own official statement on the incident confirms this.

“Do you believe that the prosecutor, after having built and presented a criminal case as horrific as this, would speak so highly of an organization that left the profile up for months after the investigation was known?”

So JB, you think “It’s a recognised forum for finding accommodation. There is nothing disreputable about it.” constitutes speaking highly of an organisation? Sounds like someone is not used to ever hearing genuine praise. All the prosecutor said was that CS is not completely disreputable.

“Can you provide a link to any instance where Couch Surfing has tied an individual profile deletion to a police report?”

Here are some for you:

http://www.couchsurfing.org/group.html?gid=20275

So JBP, I ask again, what reason do you have for continously harping on the fact that the alleged rapist was not verified in this and other forums, when it has already been widely reported that he was not, aside from it obviously being a disgusting attempt on your part to somehow insinuate that had the host been verified, the rape would not have occurred? It is nice to know that you think exploiting the trauma suffered by a rape victim is acceptable if it means an increase in verification income for CS!

Despite about a dozen posts on this thread insulting various members of the community (including myself), not a single person has yet come up with anything actually constructive to say … so I will be logging off to spend my time more productively elsewhere.

Cheers

You have to give our friend Hmmm… credit for being evenhanded. He furiously and indignantly refused to answer Amused. And he furiously and indignantly refused to answer the same question from We are Not Amused.

But I have my doubts about your conclusion that the LT does not employ shills. Actually, I think Hmmm… is a shill. The idea is to make the LT opponents look like such rabid, raving lunatics that the LT will look good by comparison.

Might work…if you ask me.

And as much as I disagree with LT, the cures often proposed by frequent posters here seem much worse than the disease.

The second suggestion would be the removal of any posters who are obvious Couchsurfing Management Team shills, who only post on this site to:

a. Attempt to stifle any valid criticisms of the CS management team by using such generalisations as “The OCS community continues to demonstrate the in-fighting and trash-talking that undermines its ability to ever do anything actually constructive or effective.”

b. And then in a breathtaking, yet perfectly characteristic, display of hypocrisy, begs for suggestions on how to better run the CS site, presumably because the CS Management team is too busy planning their next junke … uh, cooperative to do so themselves.

Complaining and taking potshots at people is easy. What is more difficult is coming up with genuinely constructive solutions. I will ask again:

*What sort of improvement would you recommend?*

A snide one sentence response attempting to pretend the half page of answers to your questions is not visible to all? You really are an ideal candidate to be a CS Global Ambassador! Of course, that was obvious to all anyway given your previous attempt to suggest that verification would have prevented the alleged rape from occurring i.e by asking “Does anyone know whether the alleged rapist was a verified member?” when it has been widely reported that he was a new member who would not have had the time to seek verification. It looks like JB feels that using the rape of a fellow couchsurfer to boost verification rates is completely justified.

“What information do you have to support the statement (actually your insinuation) that Couch Surfing allowed the profile to remain on the site for months after a police report?”

Nice deliberate misrepresentation of my comment, JB! Where exactly did you see me state that CS allowed the profile to remain after a police report? I stated that CS allowed the profile to remain, even though the victim reported the incident to the MDST months ago. CS’s own official statement on the incident confirms this.

“Do you believe that the prosecutor, after having built and presented a criminal case as horrific as this, would speak so highly of an organization that left the profile up for months after the investigation was known?”

So JB, you think “It’s a recognised forum for finding accommodation. There is nothing disreputable about it.” constitutes speaking highly of an organisation? Sounds like someone is not used to ever hearing genuine praise. All the prosecutor said was that CS is not completely disreputable.

“Can you provide a link to any instance where Couch Surfing has tied an individual profile deletion to a police report?”

Here are some for you:

http://www.couchsurfing.org/group.html?gid=20275

@hmmm…
The newspaper article cited by Pickwick at the start of this thread includes this comment about Couch Surfing by the prosecutor Mr Phillips:

‘This site enables travellers to find free accommodation with like-minded individuals, people interested in travelling, people who want to meet new people, interested in hosting people overseas, showing them some hospitality and perhaps showing them the area where they live. It’s a recognised forum for finding accommodation. There is nothing disreputable about it.’

@hmmm…
Do you believe that the prosecutor, after having built and presented a criminal case as horrific as this, would speak so highly of an organization that left the profile up for months after the investigation was known?

@hmmm…
Yes, I know we are supposed to renounce Couch Surfing and all its evil works, but what makes your inference plausible?

@hmmm…
Can you provide a link to any instance where Couch Surfing has tied an individual profile deletion to a police report? Of course, I can provide a link to your allegation that they do this, but that does not prove much.

Does anyone know whether there has been any acknowledgment of the case on the Couch Surfing Web site?

Does anyone know whether there are grounds for libel or defamation under UK law if Couch Surfing were to acknowledge that the incident has led to a criminal prosecution?