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

[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?"