meta on the AO3

[ratcreature]

There are honestly people who are still surprised/disappointed that the OTW decided on the meta on AO3 issue without broader input/discussion first? (In the comments on the announcement post.) Seriously? Even though the OTW board in the past has said explicitly that the org never builds policy in public because "policies are difficult enough to draft and revise even in private with a small team of participants".

Comments

[king_touchy]

Ha, I'm a lazy shit, and I'm glad they're doing all the work.

[ratcreature]

Mostly I'm annoyed that on one hand they make statements that pretend they are going to be more participatory all the time, and then the process is not like that at all. I'd be okay if they were plain spoken about it in a consistent fashion.

I mean, I won't volunteer in structures like that but I'd be fine with them making that choice for their org, but obviously many people are continually disappointed by their processes, because they seem to say one thing (at least sometimes) and then act in a different way.

(I myself prefer consensus based groups for volunteering, which can be initially cumbersome and sometimes not easy to scale up, but there are large groups that work like this, for example anarchists world wide have done plenty of process finding and theory work on how to work towards common goals without being majority ruled or in hierarchical organizations, so it is ideological choice not some kind of natural law to develop policies one way and not the other.)