Bullying

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Status
Not open for further replies.
JayneWonders said:
Just did a quick review.
Back in Sept 2014, it was clearly communicated in the council forum that moderators would make the decision and everyone else back away..
There was work around then to have a moderators forum where they could talk amongst themselves as well. Probably was done in PM (private message/conversation) though at the time.
Click to expand...
So this is all behind the scenes?
 
paradox3 said:
So this is all behind the scenes?
Click to expand...
Yep, which is why many of you never knew about it. I came to realize that if it were common knowledge, more people would have had my back. It wasn't that you didn't care or agreed - it was just that you didn't know.

I remember revsdd said something about this that I really appreciated, a long time ago. Here it is:
revsdd said:
I assume chansen means he was forced by the Council of the day, not by the group. And I agree - they mean nothing because they aren't sincere. If it has to be coerced then it's best not to do it at all.

Anyway, not really something I remember going on here at WC2. I assume it was in the early days and happened behind the scenes rather than publicly.
Click to expand...
I appreciated it a lot because it confirmed to me that coerced apologies are a terrible idea, and that he had no knowledge of it and therefore could not not speak out against it even if he would have wanted to, and neither could most of you.

It was just a bad decision by a small group of people.
 
paradox3 said:
So this is all behind the scenes?
Click to expand...
Well, it's available to council in their council forum.
At the time council was bigger.
Anything placed in there is visible still to any council memberof course that is different from conversations which are not visible to anyone but the participants


Shucks, there is a long thread related to chemgal's concerns with she &I going back and forth.

There are lots of relatively boring posts as well
 
ninj said:
I have figured out only a couple of us lucky ones don't act in any administrative role.
Click to expand...
In fact, there are only four people in formal administrative roles right now, i.e. on Council: Jayne, Red, Gord, and Chemgal. I retain an account that lets me do sysadmin work like upgrades but have been trying to extricate myself from the role otherwise. At most, at any given time, I think we have had seven Council members. The board has had 25-30 active members during most periods of its existence and probably a hundred or so registered discounting the various spammers whose accounts are banned or were rejected on registration. So, if you look at past Council members, sure, a lot of us have done stints on Council. But if you are evaluating whether we are "over-governed", only currently active ones count and that's 7 at most, less nowadays. And keep in mind that for a long time we had 3 Admins just to ensure backup, since the admins are the ones who deal with things like the reliability and stability of the site. Not all 3 were that active as admins. So, your contention that only a couple don't act in any administrative role doesn't stand up. Over-governed can be argued, but we are certainly not that over-governed. :giggle:
 
Last edited:
JayneWonders said:
Well, it's available to council in their council forum.
At the time council was bigger.
Anything placed in there is visible still to any council member
Click to expand...
This would explain why the general membership (not sitting on council) has so many questions.

I can appreciate the desire to keep conflict within the leadership team private. But It has spilled over into public view in both cases and here we are.
 
paradox3 said:
This would explain why the general membership (not sitting on council) has so many questions.

I can appreciate the desire to keep conflict within the leadership team private. But It has spilled over into public view in both cases and here we are.
Click to expand...
Keeping a private forum for moderators discussions is standard practice in the forum world. You do not want moderators discussing issues in the forums, including things like how to deal with reports or problem users, in a public place. And it is also standard practice in the forum world to keep conflicts among those teams backstage as much as possible. The reason, I think, is clear from current events. Many forums would ban mods/admins who take backstage conflicts out front. We don't, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to settle them backstage before they become public.
 
Mendalla said:
Keeping a private forum for moderators discussions is standard practice in the forum world. You do not want moderators discussing issues in the forums, including things like how to deal with reports or problem users, in a public place. And it is also standard practice in the forum world to keep conflicts among those teams backstage as much as possible. The reason, I think, is clear from current events. Many forums would ban mods/admins who take backstage conflicts out front. We don't, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to settle them backstage before they become public.
Click to expand...
Understandable. But here we are. What should happen now?
 
paradox3 said:
About the conflicts that should probably have remained backstage.

Do we just try to steer around them now? Is there any sense in setting up processes of mediation or the like?
Click to expand...
A number of people have, as I understand it, tried to mediate without success. That should really be a moderator role but the fact that Chemgal is still on Council makes it difficult for them to act in that role. That's part of why I took the step of removing them from Council during the first round. It is difficult for moderators to moderate when their colleagues are the ones being moderated. Probably a mistake in retrospect. Keeping them both on Council might have let things get sorted backstage, but I kind of suspect not based on subsequent experience.

At this point, I have no solution. It's their conflict and, as I said, past attempts at mediation haven't gone well.
 
That's fair @Mendalla

There was an attempt to resolve the situation with @chansen as well. I think he received a certain degree of validation from that process.

Some of these impasse situations in relationships cannot be fixed completely. This is the sad truth.
 
paradox3 said:
There was an attempt to resolve the situation with @chansen as well. I think he received a certain degree of validation from that process.
Click to expand...
What I got from that is confirmation that a number (and I suspect a plurality) of people in that conversation, and the forum, would agree with my assessment that the coerced apology was wrong.

JayneWonders mockingly suggested a poll, and when I agreed to it, the idea was quickly shut down.

Should I just assume that I'm right by how quickly the offer of a poll was removed?
 
paradox3 said:
About the conflicts that should probably have remained backstage.

Do we just try to steer around them now? Is there any sense in setting up processes of mediation or the like?
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying Paradox3. I don't think it is the community's to solve or mediate, sad as it is to see friends in such a state. For myself, I leave resolution to the individuals involved & the mods (I see they have set up a thread now). If the involved parties wish for the situation to be resolved, I trust they will find a way to do so. Finding a way back into relationship, regaining trust & integrity, is a long & winding road.

Personal attacks, accusations, & harassment contravene our agreed upon code of conduct here & in my view should not be tolerated as it does affect the overall tone and sense of safety people have about being here.

I thank the mods for the work they do here on behalf of the community. I can say from experience, it's a thankless job for the most part, painful and difficult also, and yes, one that necessarily is conducted in a respectfully confidential manner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top