[Mobius]

Yeah, I think more details would be helpful and interesting. 

[Sandwich]

So, in the interest of fairness with the summary of what all happened, the staff are working on a collaborative document (a shared Google Docs) to write the summary. We've agreed to keep debating out of it and stick to facts as much as possible. I'm hopeful that we can actually hammer out something that objectively presents what happened & when. However, I don't think it will happen quickly. If it gets completed within a week, I'd be shocked.

My question for you all is, do you want a summary of just what happened behind the closed doors of the GlobMod board, or do you also want us to integrate what was happening at the time in the PolDisc thread? I'm guessing the latter, since that is the context for everything, and PolDisc isn't precisely open to all unless you've asked for access... let us know.

[Mobius]

Sure, why not. 

Just to clarify, me (and possibly Nightmare, as well as many others) don't want this as an excuse to trigger further debates, flames and offenses. It's just a matter of "data-transparency" and finding out what happened. Simple and clean. 

[Lorric]

I would say as much as possible, internal and external.

[Nightmare]

Just to clarify, me (and possibly Nightmare, as well as many others) don't want this as an excuse to trigger further debates, flames and offenses. It's just a matter of "data-transparency" and finding out what happened. Simple and clean. 

Yep

[Phantom Hoover]

So, in the interest of fairness with the summary of what all happened, the staff are working on a collaborative document (a shared Google Docs) to write the summary. We've agreed to keep debating out of it and stick to facts as much as possible.

Who's 'we'? You're not staff any more.

[Sandwich]

So, in the interest of fairness with the summary of what all happened, the staff are working on a collaborative document (a shared Google Docs) to write the summary. We've agreed to keep debating out of it and stick to facts as much as possible.

Who's 'we'? You're not staff any more.

Until recently, "we" was just karajorma and myself, since nobody else had chimed in. But now, Mongoose has, and he's staunchly opposed to the idea. So it may not happen after all. It's not my call, sorry.

[Lorric]

So, in the interest of fairness with the summary of what all happened, the staff are working on a collaborative document (a shared Google Docs) to write the summary. We've agreed to keep debating out of it and stick to facts as much as possible.

Who's 'we'? You're not staff any more.

Until recently, "we" was just karajorma and myself, since nobody else had chimed in. But now, Mongoose has, and he's staunchly opposed to the idea. So it may not happen after all. It's not my call, sorry.

I do think you should be involved. As the only one who opposed the others, your story should be told. Your presence adds legitimacy, instead of just history being written by the victors.

[Nightmare]

I agree.

[Sandwich]

I should probably have been more precise in my wording. I had suggested that, in the interest of saving time and avoiding conflict over writing the shared doc, that an alternative might be just to lock the entire thread where things unfolded (in GlobalMods), and move it somewhere publicly accessible. That was the aspect Mongoose was staunchly opposed to, reasoning that it would just inflame things again.

On a more general level, he appears to be somewhat less opposed to recounting the tale as a summary, but I should not have termed that opposition as "staunchly opposed". It's more of a case where he doesn't see anything to gain by it, and thinks enough information has been posted that you can piece things together yourselves.

tl;dr: Making GlobMod thread public: no; composing summary document: perhaps.

[Lorric]

It would be a big step towards transparency to let us see the thread. And sure, I imagine people aren't going to be shown in a good light, but it would make a statement to move it into Site Support. You might even get some constructive, useful feedback on it.

[Nightmare]

It would be a big step towards transparency to let us see the thread. And sure, I imagine people aren't going to be shown in a good light, but it would make a statement to move it into Site Support. You might even get some constructive, useful feedback on it.

I'm certainly in favor of that. Parts of the thread have been made public, the rest was made put out as hearsay. So before more time is being wasted with debates on what happened, it could be just made public.

[Lorric]

It would be a big step towards transparency to let us see the thread. And sure, I imagine people aren't going to be shown in a good light, but it would make a statement to move it into Site Support. You might even get some constructive, useful feedback on it.

I'm certainly in favor of that. Parts of the thread have been made public, the rest was made put out as hearsay. So before more time is being wasted with debates on what happened, it could be just made public.

Put some fresh eyes on it. Maybe we'll see things you can't, both from the perspective of it always being the same staff, and that you were right in the thick of it while we can look on it from the outside as neutrals.

Be brave, and open yourselves up to scrutiny.

[MP-Ryan]

The thread will absolutely not be made public, if only because Axem is a significant participant and is no longer present to consent.

[Mobius]

I do agree that the thread can't be made public, but a description of its content - written by both sides - would definitely make up for it.

[Grizzly]

The few bits of the thread that have been made public have also been published without consent from the people involved and in the service of "winning" a petty, after the fact argument.

[Mito [PL]]

It's hard to call it "after the fact" when the decision made can be easily reversed... Even if Axem's departure cannot.

[BlackDove]

Is this really necessary?

I have no problems assuming the worst about everyone. That everyone behaved abhorrently, rushed things (a month to deal with this, so "rushed" is relative, but whatever), secret rooms, cloak and dagger stories. Backstabbing. Horrible behavior.

Who cares?

We get it. You had no function to affect change at the admin level for decades. You got desperate because you had years of bad things accumulating, and you did things outside the rules (there do not seem to have been rules for admins dealing with admins though) to enact what you thought was right.

Everyone's a terrible human being, and yet things needed to get done.

The End.

I would not care even if it went the other way. My original presumption was that everyone would quit, sans Sandwich and Goober, and they'd run HLP forever from then on. I'd be fine with that too, and would not need a history then either. I'd just assume the above all the same, and that would be sufficient.

That said, whatever floats your boats. Maybe it's good to do this for the sake of catharsis or something.

[Phantom Hoover]

I'm really with BlackDove on this one, there's very little that can be gained by relitigating whatever horrible dramatic mess went down in the internal discussions.

[Mongoose]

Just to make things perfectly clear, my opinions re: the above were not intended for public consumption, and I did not authorize Sandwich to speak on my behalf.   Like BD and PH said, my main concern is what's best for the community going forward. I'm in favor of a broad disclosure of how events progressed, but I don't see how anything good can come out of a hyper-detailed tit-for-tat.