Eurofurence Community > General Discussion
Official Statement Regarding the Policy Debate on Twitter
AliothFox:
--- Quote from: Dhary Montecore on 10.06.2015, 23:12:39 ---
--- Quote from: Tsanawo on 10.06.2015, 22:54:32 ---Just to be clear, these views are my stance and my stance only, I do not speak for any other staff members nor EuroFurence in general.
--- Quote ---Will they be personally made to apologize for the tweets in question?
--- End quote ---
I certainly hope not, the moment I will be forced to apologize for anything I wrote in my personal Twitter timeline, how outrageous it might be, is the moment I resign from staff.
--- End quote ---
I absolutely agree. I saw the tweet-conversation in question and I agree it was completely out of line, but so has been the entire conversation. This entire convention is based on the countless hours of VOLUNTEER work. Even if we wanted to we couldn't force PRIVATE people to apologise (or to anything for that matter) for what they have said on their PRIVATE twitter. The moment we would do that we would lose our staff and the con would be over for far more than 2000 people that have nothing to do nor care about this twitter drama.
You might overestimate the amount of support the agitators in this drama have amongst our attendees.
The consequences taken are clear and stated in the public statement: We WILL make sure that no offensive tweets/answers will be posted on our official twitter account again and we will establish a purely professional PR system to avoid such escalations in future.
Again, we are very sorry for the emotionally stained tweets that have been made in response to some of the tweets thrown at EF.
--- End quote ---
And you continue to call the victims the "agitators of the drama." This view only reinforces the lack of professionalism. I'm not here to stir up drama. I'm here to address legitimate grievances. If I were to tweet on my timeline in a public way (yes, the tweets in question were public - the account in question has SINCE been made private, but it wasn't at the time) about my employers/organizers, I would be relieved of my responsibilities, and rightfully so. If I were to wish death on another person in such a public way, I would be fired/relieved from any position I held - and rightfully so. Anything less is tacit endorsement of that position.
Ralphie Raccoon:
--- Quote from: Dhary Montecore on 10.06.2015, 22:29:07 ---As Chief of Security for ConFuzlled I have to state that this is NOT true and IF it ever happened it was overlooked by my team by accident.
--- End quote ---
It was while the Con was at the Britannia, so some years ago. It was also on the last day after the closing ceremony, but security were still present. They had a little get together near the nightclub. It may have been before your time, I don't know when you joined. There were sleepers and "kiddie" clothes, and a few pacis around necks. No exposed diapers, as you'd expect. Quite discreet, really. Trust me, it happened, as a couple of them are good friends of mine. Nobody seemed bothered. Personally I don't think such things are an issue, after all, I've seen worse things at fancy dress parties in nightclubs(!), but of course I don't make the rules.
And Thankyou for accepting my suggestion! At least then if anything, if someone wears something specific that is banned you have something to cite that will prevent a dispute. Saves a whole lot of bother if you can just point to a list! :)
Tsanawo:
I think we're using two different meaning of private which confused the conversation a bit.
1. Private as in personal
2. Private as in protected.
To avoid confusion is it possible to use either personal or protected instead of private in both cases. This might help clear up some miscommunication.
AliothFox:
--- Quote from: Tsanawo on 10.06.2015, 23:39:23 ---I think we're using two different meaning of private which confused the conversation a bit.
1. Private as in personal
2. Private as in protected.
To avoid confusion is it possible to use either personal or protected instead of private in both cases. This might help clear up some miscommunication.
--- End quote ---
To clarify, then. The tweet in question was made from a personal account. The account was NOT protected at the time the tweet was made, but it has since been switched to protected.
Dhary Montecore:
--- Quote from: AliothFox on 10.06.2015, 23:18:25 ---And you continue to call the victims the "agitators of the drama." This view only reinforces the lack of professionalism. I'm not here to stir up drama. I'm here to address legitimate grievances. If I were to tweet on my timeline in a public way (yes, the tweets in question were public - the account in question has SINCE been made private, but it wasn't at the time) about my employers/organizers, I would be relieved of my responsibilities, and rightfully so. If I were to wish death on another person in such a public way, I would be fired/relieved from any position I held - and rightfully so. Anything less is tacit endorsement of that position.
--- End quote ---
You are measuring a volunteer organisation by commercial standards. This does not work. And yes, I am talking about the agitators. Those that sparked the entire drama by very personal and insulting tweets. I do NOT talk about the babyfur community or those (more than 80%) of the participants of the conversations that argued in a calm and respectable manner. This entire escalation is based on a few known agitators and the very emotional and unprofessional response they got. Our response is not to be excused but so are the original tweets.
Again, we are a volunteer organisation, we are NOT paid, we pay ourselves. So please do not try to force a convention organisation into a commercial companies frame.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version