The SF3 Board's An Apology

[james_davis_nicoll]

The SF3 Board extends heartfelt apologies to those who have been harassed at WisCon, to those who feel unsafe at WisCon, to the ConCom, and to our wider community, for letting you down. We regret allowing Rose Lemberg’s report to languish.

Comments

[lostwanderfound.livejournal.com]

What's the count up to now?

Something about "quality over quantity" comes to mind.

[(Anonymous)]

It's a shitty apology, too - more mournful about the "valued" concom members who have chosen to resign than any specific incident, churlish about being prompted to apologize, only specifically apologizing to a single person, and then only for "bureaucratic lapses" and "allowing [a] report to languish". It's about as sincere and heartfelt as a click-through EULA despite using the words "heartfelt" and "genuinely sorry". At least it's lacking the signature trait of a terrible apology (the use of the word "If").

According to them, the whole mess was the result, not of a toxic culture or active malice or specific bad actors, but a failure of bureaucratic procedure, which reminds me of Ronald Reagan's declaration that the root cause of the Iran Contra scandal was a failure to keep proper records of meetings and decisions and that everything was OK now because he told the American people that "Well, rest assured, there's plenty of record-keeping now going on at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue."

[lostwanderfound.livejournal.com]

Yup, they're still trying to spin this as pure incompetence.

While it's technically possible for that to be true, the appearances suggest otherwise strongly enough to at least demand a convincing explanation (no, not a subcommittee that will issue a statement in a year or two) of why this quacking and waddling thing isn't actually a duck.

Bungled? Bad. Actively sabotaged? Worse. Continuing efforts to cover-up the apparent sabotage and protect the bad actors? Petrol on a fire.

[(Anonymous)]

Tee hee, gosh there are so many details that go into hosting a con, and we're just a ragtag band of unpaid volunteers that are spread across the entire country and you have no idea just how hard everything is and we're rilly rilly sorry but sometimes things slip through the cracks and really it's amazing that things run as smoothly as they do, y'know?

Yeah, not buying it. Multiple people sent emails to multiple con staff asking for follow up and updates and got handwaved away EVERY SINGLE TIME over the course of more than a year. That's excuse-making on behalf of a deliberate policy of burying the reports and making the complaints Go Away, not a harried bureaucracy losing track of things.

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

I have really had it with apologies to the ConCom being given equal prominence with (to?) apologizes to the actual victims.

Also, I seem to have missed the flat-out "We screwed up"; no doubt it got buried among the earnest critiques of process.

[eub.livejournal.com]

The part about "We are writing this statement as prompted by [people]" is quite odd. And "While this statement is being written per their request, the SF3 board would like to emphasize that it is genuinely sorry [...]"

Some things I find poor in an apology but I can understand the human failing (like focus on apologizer more than on apologizee, use of agency-obscuring wording). But this advisory about SF3's apology-making process, I don't really get what it's even doing here. Maybe it falls under general emphasis on telling me what's up with the apologizer.

[lostwanderfound.livejournal.com]

Seen their new big plan?

http://file770.com/?p=19028

It's to provide greater accountability from the board.

By establishing a byzantine, drawn-out and pseudo-judicial system of reprimands for misbehaving board members.

Here comes the new boss, same as the old boss...

[eub.livejournal.com]

Thanks, I hadn't seen it; that may be what they meant by the weirdly vague "We will focus on our accountability". The accountability petition doesn't say it'll be pseudo-judicial. I guess I'll wait and see.

Whatever kind of thing they decide to try for accountability, I hope that they will run it on the recent events (I do not want to hear any "but ex post facto laws are unconstitutional", okay), rather than just say the process is ready to go for next time. Because there shouldn't be a next time if some accountability could prevent it.

Can they keep community members from holding con roles that they've done damage with? I have doubts it will happen; it's a hard thing to do. But if they can, good.

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

Can they keep community members from holding con roles that they've done damage with?

Do we have evidence that they desire to do so? The repeated apologies to themselves the Concon staff suggest otherwise.

[(Anonymous)]

Pointing out that you're only apologizing because of a specific request that you do so kind of cuts away at the whole "heartfelt" component of it, doesn't it?

That line reminded me of the sort of apologies that parents or teachers would compel out of kids - stare at the ground, mumble inaudibly, draw it out, and then yell "Fine! I'm sorry! Is that what you wanted to hear? Can I go now?"

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

I no longer attend enough conventions to make no never-mind, but my guess is that WisCon is probably the safest convenion of its size in the country (and I don't limit this to Science-Fiction Conventions, assuming that the one of Baptist Ministers' Wives is somewhat smaller). Frankly, I think that if they continue to (as they seem to be doing) attempt to make it _absolutely Safe_ they'll descend into total collapse. But then, I also think that it's impossible to get more than about fifty people together without having at least one knucklehead, and that it's irrational (& maybe even knuckleheaded) to believe otherwise.

For Full Disclosure: If memory serves, I've attended two WisCons and one or two other cons in Madison put on by pretty much the same people. They were delightful, but I don't expect to get back there because I'm getting too old to cope with air travel and because having become "profoundly deaf" has seriously diminished my pleasure in the con experience. Also, being totally deaf has caused me to pay a lot more visual attention to the people around me, and I suppose that would freak-out at least one or two WisCon attendees.

[redbird]

Do you really think it's more chaotic to kick someone out for sexual harassment and physical assault than to ignore the incidents because the perpetrator is a pro editor and long-time member of the community? The problem isn't that a group of more than 50 will contain at least one knucklehead; it's deciding that therefore you'll accept an unlimited number of knuckleheads rather than tell people to leave if they are harassing people at meetings of the group.

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

If by "Absolutely Safe", you mean "cease to tolerate BNFs who physically threaten attendees", I'm thinking it's not going to lead to Imminent Death of Fandom Predicted, Film At 11.

An If This Goes On argument is exceptionally ill-founded when what *was* going on, both to Lemberg and to those harassed by Frenkel, should not have been tolerated at any convention.

" I suppose that would freak-out at least one or two WisCon attendees." Unless you practice the newly-invented art of breast-reading, I think you'd be safe.

[lostwanderfound.livejournal.com]

absolutely safe no longer a long-standing consequence-free safe haven for known predators.

Fixed that for you.

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

Aha! Thanks. I hadn't understood that his actions had been so serious or so long-standing. Of course, I'm now wondering why the police hadn't been called in long before, and why he hadn't already been banned by this convention and other ones. I think, however, that I'll be better off continuing to wonder.

And mayhap my confidence in the ConCom of this convention was overly-influenced by my admiration for the people who put on the earlier ones. I do note, however, that I've worked on enough conventions to know how easy it is for something like a letter or even the fact of a serious complaint to get mislaid between one year and the next.

[lostwanderfound.livejournal.com]

"Once is unfortunate, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action" is the phrase that springs to mind.

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

Natalie Luhrs can bring you up to speed.

overly-influenced by my admiration for the people who put on the earlier ones

This is exactly what got WisCon (and, before it, ReaderCon, and the list is long) in trouble. Prioritizing "I know X, and respect X" over "Person Y says that X misbehaved" is what lets people continue misbehaving year after year after year. People who have built up social credit can still harass other people, can still mysteriously lose evidence, can still behave extremely badly. Sadly, many Xs behave kindly and appropriately to their friends, and badly in other contexts.

We all owe it to our communities -- and to ourselves -- to have our first reaction to claims of harassment to be "I should evaluate the evidence" and not "But I know the harasser!"

[lostwanderfound.livejournal.com]

We all owe it to our communities -- and to ourselves -- to have our first reaction to claims of harassment to be "I should evaluate the evidence" and not "But I know the harasser!"

This is about more than Frenkel and harassment, BTW (not that Frenkel wasn't bad enough already).

Walter Breen was not the last of his kind; fandom has to start taking this shit seriously or there are going to be a lot more "heartfelt apologies" in the future.

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

I didn't mean to downplay Rose Lemberg's experiences (or others). There's a lot that's being overlooked.

[lostwanderfound.livejournal.com]

Incidentally, I wonder how many cons and fan organisations in the last year have given any serious thought to "how do we prevent the next Breen from happening?"