|
In Reply to: Acheick's deleted post posted by Farmer on November 14, 2004 at 06:41:05:
Maybe we should add "discernment" to one of the buzzwords here, our dictionary of loaded terms, considering the background we came from. I'm half joking, and I hope you'll understand my humor behind this statement. The half of me that isn't joking, let me explain:
In regards to our background, "discernment" is/was a magical catch-all term that implies/means a gift from the Holy Spirit of infallible knowlege, omniscience, tapping into knowlege that comes through direct revelation from God - therefore implying that since people whom you credit as having this gift cannot be wrong about their judgement, by default it must mean the other parties such as exFamily.org are the ones at fault.
Well, it's not about fault or blame. Farmer, I understand you are puzzled, so I'll try to clarify a little further.
To say her post offended me or anyone of the remaining staff is perhaps over-dramatizing it. "Offensive" is too strong a word, at least speaking for myself. Several of us thought there were misrepresentations and inaccuracies. But they are nothing worth spilling blood over, nothing worth breaking agreements of confidentiality over, nothing worth embarassing 3rd parties over, and nothing worth creating arguments on our site (or any other IMO) over. They are perspectives, even if inaccurate or re-writings of history, in our opinion.
Kinda Gentler & some others who were not "offended" (and as I said I wasn't "offended" either) weren't there on the staff forum participating in discussions, watching events transpire. They don't have to assume the same kind of responsibility for what is being posted on our boards. They don't have to feel under pressure to set the record straight and in so doing cross over the line and get into discussing things we signed and agreed to keep private, discuss 3rd parties who aren't even participating in the discussions, etc.
Acheick was not "encouraged" to post by the exFamily.org coordinators. That may be a misunderstanding.
Chronology is important.
If we take the starting point of her circulating an email. We received a copy of that after some time. We thought there were inaccuracies, but no big deal, really.
Some people like you were asking for a public statement, so I made one in "About Soapbox and recent changes at exFamily.org."
Some of her supporters/friends either at her bidding or of their own accord, possibly in reaction to my post, wanted to see that email posted on our site.
Our first reaction was that she may not have intended to post it herself. So we took it down. See "Out of respect for Acheick"
Then we had to ask ourselves about what would inevitably happen if such a post were to be made. We addressed that issue in a post titled "Double Bind":
I will say this though. I am really sorry that Acheick or anyone is offended and if deciding to keep this off the boards and deleting is adding insult to injury. I really am. I wish there was a better way to go about this. I have no ill will towards ANY of the coordinators who've left. I have no wish to get drawn in into he-said-she-said's, etc.
To be perfectly honest I don't have the inclination or time to deal with this need for drama. There are more important things to do with my time. When I come to the site, I get busy with maintenance work, projects, etc. There was a period I didn't even read the boards, and even a period when I had an extended absence. Perhaps that is when some of the troubles started happening and I wasn't aware of it. And to make things worse, I haven't been that accesible. I don't answer 90% of the emails if they require more than 10 lines from me as a reply. That's the way it gets if you're busy.
One last thing I want to address in your post, I don't know how you think we're supposed to satisfy you with information about what happened behind the scenes, because, being absolutely blunt:
1) We don't owe that to you or the public.
We are trying to be as transparent as we can, but there are some places we just don't go. See my post "How and where do I even begin?"
2) You still seem to want the offended parties to play out a script for you, to settle things amicably, make a statement that is soothing to the eye... Carol is her own person and she has a her own way of seeing things... she won't apologize if she doesn't think she's wrong. Furthermore she has resigned, and has stated that she is not coming to the boards, and I have had very little communication with her since even before her resignation.
3) I understand that not feeling free to discuss means "secrecy," implies "cover-up" or "selah" - just a few of the loaded buzzwords that have been thrown at us lately. If you don't understand how normal it is to have agreements of confidentiality, please read the discussion between Roger and Joseph. That's the way it works in the real world. I repeat, we have nothing to hide, just places we don't want to go, not for our own sakes, and even though it hurts our reputation.
