Professional fandom
Apologies for the lack of backstory links, I'm typing this from a phone. I think that's the only comment I've made in what I'm linking other than maybe something about php and ruby.

Otw (organization for transformative works) elections are happening right now, and boy is it wanky.

It was going to be unfunny, as you might imagine when three of the six candidates mention volunteer burn out ( http://facetofcathy.dreamwidth.org/229943.html ) in their candidate statements and one candidate Naomi Novik, founding member says she hasn't noticed.

Well if she hasn't noticed it can't be true right?

http://renay.dreamwidth.org/236955.html

Oh. Oh dear.

Add in that Sanders the candidate of colour has kept her main fandom journal for elections, and has a similar platform to the others, is told that she is too angry and has her friends getting anon comments telling them to tell her to watch her tone.

Then shit blows up when they fuck up the skins for "accessibility" when the new default is grey on grey and lots of red.

http://branchandroot.dreamwidth.org/1255716.html#comments

Apparently this was rushed to get the archive ready for Yuletide. Only Yuletide isn't a otw project.

http://fail-fandomanon.livejournal.com/22095.html?thread=99563087#t99563087

But what really has me gobsmacked is this,
from: copracat
Let me make sure I have this correctly:

The chair of the board has been told by someone/s to stop working on a strategic plan for the organisation because she doesn't have the authority to do so.

I'm going to make a cup of tea now.

-----
general-jinjur (the chair in question)

more accurately, i was told that i was dishonest, conspiratorial, and secretive because:

- i asked for volunteers to help gather info and work on preliminaries in an org-wide meeting (org-wide meetings are attended by a large group of volunteers and staff, including at least one representative from every committee)
- discussed how a strategic plan was on the horizon in at least two other org-wide meetings
- hired a staffer (one who, like all our staff, was unanimously board-approved) specifically to work on stakeholder surveys (beginning of 2011 term) as part of preliminary work (staffer wound up with international outreach, as they were best to start that piece).

by doing the above, i secretly formed a cabal without ever giving anyone a chance to participate. also, i failed to do all the work (research and write-up of a proposal for the plan for the process) myself rather than involving anyone or doing any delegation.

just to clarify. (perspectives vary, of course. this is my perspective on events. i officially don't care to argue its accuracy anymore; i have just enough energy and time left to tie up loose ends and write up documentation of the stuff i did manage to accomplish (in 2010. i'm a little behind on docs).)

http://copracat.dreamwidth.org/596794.html?thread=2267962#cmt2267962

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	amadi 2011-11-14 12:07 am UTC (link)
	I think that so long as people are still serving, they're not willing to name names because they have to work with the people they'd be naming. And once people are out, they're just so burned out and broken that they don't have the energy to point fingers and say "You, Jane Doe, you were the one who made this experience so damned miserable!" (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

ekaterinv
2011-11-14 06:44 am UTC (link)

Yes, and I do understand that. Obviously, most people think running around yelling "j'accuse!" is pointless and wanky. But I have seen plenty of communities implode in these circumstances. A bunch of people who are too worn out to talk about it leave, their friends leave, the friends of their friends leave, and at the end all that's left is a tiny circlejerk of BNF-types who think they're too important to pay attention to the little people.

OTW looks to be barely pre-implosion right now, and it doesn't look like the high-ups are taking any notice.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

amadi
2011-11-14 10:17 am UTC (link)

Certain high-ups are well aware of how bad it is. I mean, Allison gets it (outgoing board chair, general_jinjur). Three of the five (formerly four of six) candidates for the upcoming board election get it.

Really, the election is going to be the deciding factor in the OTW's ongoing health; frankly, if Naomi Novik ends up back on the board, well let's just say that I'll be glad that I've been uploading all of my fic to Dreamwidth as well as AO3.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

ekaterinv
2011-11-14 10:23 am UTC (link)

By "the high-ups" I really only meant Naomi Novik and her friend who's on the board now and whose name I can't remember but I am too lazy to look it up atm. It begins with an e, I think. They seem to be the people insisting certain things be One Way, even when that way is messing up a lot of other stuff, and stonewalling when other people try to get things done. Novik's tone has been really off-putting too; I can imagine her airily waving her hand and chuckling about all these silly people who claim there are problems. I doubt that's how she wants to present herself.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

amadi
2011-11-14 10:32 am UTC (link)

Absolutely. And I think that this really awful code push suspiciously timed just as the massive server overload period that is Yuletide nominations is happening says it all.

Who runs Yuletide and moved it to the AO3 over voluminous objection with promises about coding marvels for running fests/exchanges on AO3 that still don't fully exist 2? 3? years later...

If people don't get that, honestly, I don't know how to make it any more clear to them.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

undomielregina
2011-11-14 01:33 pm UTC (link)

What's really stunning to me is that every staff member, every volunteer and every board member I've seen post endorsements, with the notable exception of Francesca Coppa, the other founder, has not endorsed Novik. It's pretty clear to me that the founders are in direct conflict with the vast majority of the organization and need to step aside for people who will not directly impede change because it's not exactly in line with their outdated vision.

That sounds really harsh, and the funny thing is that I generally like both Novik and Coppa when I interact with them, but omg they need to get their heads out of the sand STAT and until they do I don't want Novik anywhere near the board (or Coppa, really, but her term's not up so...).

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

amadi
2011-11-14 01:41 pm UTC (link)

I think Naomi has to realize today that the majority of the org is against her, and with good reason, but she's clinging on with the power of a.) being founder; and b.) having the power to push code, however buggy, untested and unready it is (in service of her pet annual Yuletide project, not the org or archive as a whole).

I honestly wish this morning that I had 1/10 of Naomi Novik's exhibited IDGAF capacity. How much nicer must life be when you can just glide through doing whatever the hell you want and let others, like poor Lim, take the heat?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

ekaterinv
2011-11-14 07:12 pm UTC (link)

How much nicer must life be when you can just glide through doing whatever the hell you want and let others, like poor Lim, take the heat?

I have to think that people who do that regularly know, deep down, that what they're doing is wrong, and therefore can't ever be truly happy and satisfied with themselves. I feel like if Novik were confident and content with herself, she'd see that management is not one of her strengths, and be happy enough about her other strengths to step back and let the organization she helped found flourish. If she can't do that... well, she'll probably end up unhappy about OTW, anyway, because it will not reach the potential she sees for it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	cmdr_zoom 2011-11-14 08:21 pm UTC (link)
	But it would, if only everyone else would stop working against her and having their own opinions! :p (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -