This is a call for a docent vote on the continued role of OlyBlog founder Rick McKinnon.
My vote is that Rick step down from his duties as docent and turn OlyBlog over to the Olympia community currently invested in the space as per his initial plan. I've been thinking about this awhile due to the difficulties people have separating him from OlyBlog but it was his behavior on this thread (http://olyblog.net/starting-point-thoughts-online-community) that made up my mind. Included with this e-mail is a private message conversation Rick and I have been involved in since last week. As much of the content involves OlyBlog administration I think it should have been on the docent list for all of us to talk about from the beginning (as previously agreed upon).
I realize this brings more drama to the blog space and I apologize up front about that, it is not my goal. I do this because I firmly believe it is in the best long term interests of the OlyBlog community.
I hope this finds you all well, - Jason
From: Rick To: enpen Subject: Dude Date: Wed, 07/16/2008 - 10:34pm
If you be so kind as to speak clearly about what's on your mind, I'd be very appreciative. I'm having trouble following along with the insinuations and allusions.
From: enpen To: Rick Subject: Re: Dude Date: Wed, 07/16/2008 - 10:49pm
What insinuations and allusions?
From: Rick To: enpen Subject: Re: Dude Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 8:13am
The insinuation that we are not trying to educate ourselves about how to make this a better community. We've been doing nothing else for three years. I really don't know where you're coming from on this.
From: enpen To: Rick Subject: Re: Dude Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 8:25am
I didn't realize I was insinuating that. I think you might be taking this all a little bit too personally.
From: Rick To: enpen Subject: Re: Dude Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:08am
Perhaps you should have considered that personal feelings were involved before choosing your words. This is not the first time that I've thought that.
From: enpen To: Rick Subject: Re: Dude Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 3:12pm
Rick, I think you're acting like a jerk. I've been thinking about personal feelings involved, specifically I'm thinking about how shitty it is to call you a jerk, but between these private messages and in the epersonae stream you're coming across as a jerk. This is not the first time I've thought that.
From: Rick To: enpen Subject: Re: Dude Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 4:23pm
Back atcha, brother.
I would have thought that you would be as sick to death as I am of people who haven't done shit around here telling us what to do with blog. I'm fed up with it, and I'm fed up with the attitude that you express about how we're not building community here. That's complete bullshit and I have no idea where it comes from. It isn't perfect -- no one would claim it is -- but this is an experiment, so I'd like to not be criticized for doing if fucking wrong. There is no right way!
From: enpen To: Rick Subject: Re: Dude Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 6:07pm
Nobody is criticizing you. Go take a chill pill. You keep asking people to differentiate between the docents and the blog, so I recommend you start recognizing the difference yourself.
People want to get involved but when you react to their suggestions like you have been it puts them off and sends them back out looking for other spaces. From past customer service experience I find the best way to get people involved is to try to figure out ways of directing their energy and taking their suggestions and trying to get them to help is how that works. You've been in a criticize first and ask questions later mode for months and the only thing it does is deter people from wanting to take some ownership of the place.
To be honest, I think you ought to step down as docent and truly give the space over to the Olympia community.
From: Rick To: enpen Subject: Re: Dude Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 7:44pm
You need to look at your communication in this situation, Jason. I actually didn't criticize anyone -- I responded with an analysis. You chose to question my analysis in particularly unhelpful manner. Perhaps you don't know this, but it's quite aggressive to ask someone if they're telling the truth (out of the blue). Then, sticking to you poor choice of words, you stubbornly persisted in your pejorative characterization. Take some responsibility for the way you express yourself. I'm perfectly willing to do the same.
From: enpen To: Rick Subject: Re: Dude Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:29pm
Rick, I disagree with you. I don't think it was a poor choice of words. I do think you think it was a poor choice of words. I also think your response to epersonae falls into a pattern of unwillingness to actually enter into conversation with people looking to offer suggestions for the space.
Here is me taking responsibility: I would not retract my comments. Perhaps using "is that a valid analysis" would have been more accurate than "is that really true" but the point still stands that I fundamentally disagree with your conclusion of what our traffic shows regarding our knowledge of how to create a thriving online community. The Daily Olympian gets tens of thousands of hits but I would hardly portray it as a thriving online community.
I think you should step down as a docent. It seems that neither you nor the users are able to divorce OlyBlog from Rick and in order for the place to take the next step into Community ownership that really needs to happen.
From: Rick To: enpen Subject: Re: Dude Date: Fri, 07/18/2008 - 12:17am
Jason,
Your lack of ability to take responsibility for your own communication concerns me. I'm not sure on which planet it is ok to openly disrespect friends, but it sure isn't this one. You blundered into a conversation with no skill, and no humility, and you continue to hold to untenable claims.
Your disagreement with me was what exactly? I stated in my response to Elaine that our challenge is to create more active participation. You claim to disagree, yet assert the same. I looked through the links provided when they were posted, and saw nothing really applicable or specific to our needs. You claim there is, yet provide no examples. I can only assume from this that you're more interested in creating heat than light.
I object to the use of "tourist" to refer to our readership. You strain the semantics of the word to the breaking point.
I really wonder why you were a party to this conversation at all? I fear you fell into the trap of defending someone else's position (Elaine's); something that no one asked you to do, and didn't need doing in the first place. I regret that Elaine and I were unable to have an uninterrupted conversation.
And finally: your suggestions are impertinent. I'll not be stepping down as docent until such a time that there are people who will actually show up for meetings.
From: enpen To: Rick Subject: Re: Dude Date: Fri, 07/18/2008 - 7:42am Rick,
What are you talking about? From my very first post to you I questioned your reading of the statistics as evidence that "the challenge that we face isn't how to start or maintain a community (our traffic shows that we are already able to do that)". Again, the statistics show that of nearly 2000 people coming to OlyBlog every day about .2% (1 in 400) are active in creating content. If that's your idea of evidence that we are able to maintain a "community" then again I refer you to The Olympian and their user statistics. If you want to call that successful maintenance of a community then I question your definitions. My point, once again, is that this isn't just an other people issue, this is an issue on our part as well.
Regarding taking responsibility: I am taking responsibility for my communication, what I am not taking responsibility for is negative connotations you bring to the table expecting other people to know about. You say I strain the semantics of the word "tourist" to the breaking point but the only thing demeaning about the term is your claim that it's negative. From a denotational perspective you protest too much. I referred to OlyBlog as a good tourist destination (something any linear model would love) but again it is not my understanding that a linear model of knowledge sharing is our goal for community. If it is then we're a success. If it's not, then we do not have traffic statistics showing we know how to maintain a community.
"I looked through the links provided when they were posted, and saw nothing really applicable or specific to our needs. You claim there is, yet provide no examples."
"I really wonder why you were a party to this conversation at all? I fear you fell into the trap of defending somebody else's position (Elaine's); something that no one asked you to do, and didn't need doing in the first place."
Because it is a public conversation, or are you forgetting that? And if you go back and reread the thread I think it's pretty apparent that the only things I actively defended were my assertion that perhaps we could learn about activating the passive readership from some of the links provided and my diction. If you want to have a serious conversation about falling into the trap of defending someone else's position when nobody asked you to do it then I think you should have a look at your arguments regarding the term "tourist."
"I'll not be stepping down as docent until such a time that there are people who will actually show up for meetings."
That's too bad as I'm absolutely positive that more people would have become more active with OlyBlog were it apparent that the space is no longer yours and belongs to the community of Olympia as you have said. I think we should put it to a public vote of the OlyBlog community. In fact, I think that's just about the highest form of respect that we can show them.
Either or you could have backed off the PM backandforth and any point, but you didn't.
My thoughts after this sentence are as much about me leaving in a week or so than what we're discussing here: Olyblog is not the only, nor is it the most important, blog in Olympia. It is a blog, not the blog. We were never meant to have the one big blog, we were meant to have tons of blogs, running around being there own things. Olyblog will never be perfect, but it will be.
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:13 AM, jason <dreamsj...@yahoo.com> wrote: > This is a call for a docent vote on the continued role of OlyBlog founder > Rick McKinnon.
> My vote is that Rick step down from his duties as docent and turn OlyBlog > over to the Olympia community currently invested in the space as per his > initial plan. I've been thinking about this awhile due to the difficulties > people have separating him from OlyBlog but it was his behavior on this > thread (http://olyblog.net/starting-point-thoughts-online-community) that > made up my mind. Included with this e-mail is a private message > conversation Rick and I have been involved in since last week. As much of > the content involves OlyBlog administration I think it should have been on > the docent list for all of us to talk about from the beginning (as > previously agreed upon).
> I realize this brings more drama to the blog space and I apologize up front > about that, it is not my goal. I do this because I firmly believe it is in > the best long term interests of the OlyBlog community.
> I hope this finds you all well, > - Jason
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Dude > Date: Wed, 07/16/2008 - 10:34pm
> If you be so kind as to speak clearly about what's on your mind, I'd be very > appreciative. I'm having trouble following along with the insinuations and > allusions.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Wed, 07/16/2008 - 10:49pm
> What insinuations and allusions?
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 8:13am
> The insinuation that we are not trying to educate ourselves about how to > make this a better community. We've been doing nothing else for three years. > I really don't know where you're coming from on this.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 8:25am
> I didn't realize I was insinuating that. I think you might be taking this > all a little bit too personally.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:08am
> Perhaps you should have considered that personal feelings were involved > before choosing your words. This is not the first time that I've thought > that.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 3:12pm
> Rick, I think you're acting like a jerk. I've been thinking about personal > feelings involved, specifically I'm thinking about how shitty it is to call > you a jerk, but between these private messages and in the epersonae stream > you're coming across as a jerk. This is not the first time I've thought > that.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 4:23pm
> Back atcha, brother.
> I would have thought that you would be as sick to death as I am of people > who haven't done shit around here telling us what to do with blog. I'm fed > up with it, and I'm fed up with the attitude that you express about how > we're not building community here. That's complete bullshit and I have no > idea where it comes from. It isn't perfect -- no one would claim it is -- > but this is an experiment, so I'd like to not be criticized for doing if > fucking wrong. There is no right way!
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 6:07pm
> Nobody is criticizing you. Go take a chill pill. You keep asking people to > differentiate between the docents and the blog, so I recommend you start > recognizing the difference yourself.
> People want to get involved but when you react to their suggestions like you > have been it puts them off and sends them back out looking for other spaces. > From past customer service experience I find the best way to get people > involved is to try to figure out ways of directing their energy and taking > their suggestions and trying to get them to help is how that works. You've > been in a criticize first and ask questions later mode for months and the > only thing it does is deter people from wanting to take some ownership of > the place.
> To be honest, I think you ought to step down as docent and truly give the > space over to the Olympia community.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 7:44pm
> You need to look at your communication in this situation, Jason. I actually > didn't criticize anyone -- I responded with an analysis. You chose to > question my analysis in particularly unhelpful manner. Perhaps you don't > know this, but it's quite aggressive to ask someone if they're telling the > truth (out of the blue). Then, sticking to you poor choice of words, you > stubbornly persisted in your pejorative characterization. Take some > responsibility for the way you express yourself. I'm perfectly willing to do > the same.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:29pm
> Rick, I disagree with you. I don't think it was a poor choice of words. I do > think you think it was a poor choice of words. I also think your response to > epersonae falls into a pattern of unwillingness to actually enter into > conversation with people looking to offer suggestions for the space.
> Here is me taking responsibility: I would not retract my comments. Perhaps > using "is that a valid analysis" would have been more accurate than "is that > really true" but the point still stands that I fundamentally disagree with > your conclusion of what our traffic shows regarding our knowledge of how to > create a thriving online community. The Daily Olympian gets tens of > thousands of hits but I would hardly portray it as a thriving online > community.
> I think you should step down as a docent. It seems that neither you nor the > users are able to divorce OlyBlog from Rick and in order for the place to > take the next step into Community ownership that really needs to happen.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Fri, 07/18/2008 - 12:17am
> Jason,
> Your lack of ability to take responsibility for your own communication > concerns me. I'm not sure on which planet it is ok to openly disrespect > friends, but it sure isn't this one. You blundered into a conversation with > no skill, and no humility, and you continue to hold to untenable claims.
> Your disagreement with me was what exactly? I stated in my response to > Elaine that our challenge is to create more active participation. You claim > to disagree, yet assert the same. I looked through the links provided when > they were posted, and saw nothing really applicable or specific to our > needs. You claim there is, yet provide no examples. I can only assume from > this that you're more interested in creating heat than light.
> I object to the use of "tourist" to refer to our readership. You strain the > semantics of the word to the breaking point.
> I really wonder why you were a party to this conversation at all? I fear you > fell into the trap of defending someone else's position (Elaine's); > something that no one asked you to do, and didn't need doing in the first > place. I regret that Elaine and I were unable to have an uninterrupted > conversation.
> And finally: your suggestions are impertinent. I'll not be stepping down as > docent until such a time that there are people who will actually show up for > meetings.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Fri, 07/18/2008 - 7:42am > Rick,
> What are you talking about? From my very first post to you I questioned your > reading of the statistics as evidence that "the challenge that we face isn't > how to start or maintain a community (our traffic shows that we are already > able to do that)". Again, the statistics show that of nearly 2000 people > coming to OlyBlog every day about .2% (1 in 400) are active in creating > content. If that's your idea of evidence that we are able to maintain a > "community" then again I refer you to The Olympian and their user > statistics. If you want to call that successful maintenance of a community > then I question your definitions. My point, once again, is that this isn't > just an other people issue, this is an issue on our part as well.
> Regarding taking responsibility: I am taking responsibility for my > communication, what I am not taking responsibility for is negative > connotations you bring to the table expecting other people to know about. > You say I strain the semantics of the word "tourist" to the breaking point > but the only thing demeaning about the term is your claim that it's > negative. From a denotational perspective you protest too much. I referred > to OlyBlog as a good tourist destination (something any linear model would > love) but again it is not my understanding that a linear model of knowledge > sharing is our goal for community. If it is then we're a success. If it's > not, then we do not have traffic statistics showing we know how to maintain > a community.
> "I looked through the links provided when they were posted, and saw nothing > really applicable or specific to our needs. You claim there is, yet provide > no examples."
> "I really wonder why you were a party to this conversation at all? I fear > you fell into the trap of defending somebody else's position (Elaine's); > something that no one asked you to do, and didn't need doing in the first > place."
> Because it is a public conversation, or are you forgetting
This is so disappointing, Jason. I had thought you were a person one could reason with, or at least trust. I find I was wrong about that on both counts.
jason wrote: > This is a call for a docent vote on the continued role of OlyBlog > founder Rick McKinnon.
> My vote is that Rick step down from his duties as docent and turn > OlyBlog over to the Olympia community currently invested in the space > as per his initial plan. I've been thinking about this awhile due to > the difficulties people have separating him from OlyBlog but it was > his behavior on this thread > (http://olyblog.net/starting-point-thoughts-online-community) that > made up my mind. Included with this e-mail is a private message > conversation Rick and I have been involved in since last week. As > much of the content involves OlyBlog administration I think it should > have been on the docent list for all of us to talk about from the > beginning (as previously agreed upon).
> I realize this brings more drama to the blog space and I apologize up > front about that, it is not my goal. I do this because I firmly > believe it is in the best long term interests of the OlyBlog community.
> I hope this finds you all well, > - Jason
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Dude > Date: Wed, 07/16/2008 - 10:34pm
> If you be so kind as to speak clearly about what's on your mind, I'd > be very appreciative. I'm having trouble following along with the > insinuations and allusions.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Wed, 07/16/2008 - 10:49pm
> What insinuations and allusions?
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 8:13am
> The insinuation that we are not trying to educate ourselves about how > to make this a better community. We've been doing nothing else for > three years. I really don't know where you're coming from on this.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 8:25am
> I didn't realize I was insinuating that. I think you might be taking > this all a little bit too personally.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:08am
> Perhaps you should have considered that personal feelings were > involved before choosing your words. This is not the first time that > I've thought that.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 3:12pm
> Rick, I think you're acting like a jerk. I've been thinking about > personal feelings involved, specifically I'm thinking about how shitty > it is to call you a jerk, but between these private messages and in > the epersonae stream you're coming across as a jerk. This is not the > first time I've thought that.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 4:23pm
> Back atcha, brother.
> I would have thought that you would be as sick to death as I am of > people who haven't done shit around here telling us what to do with > blog. I'm fed up with it, and I'm fed up with the attitude that you > express about how we're not building community here. That's complete > bullshit and I have no idea where it comes from. It isn't perfect -- > no one would claim it is -- but this is an experiment, so I'd like to > not be criticized for doing if fucking wrong. There is no right way!
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 6:07pm
> Nobody is criticizing you. Go take a chill pill. You keep asking > people to differentiate between the docents and the blog, so I > recommend you start recognizing the difference yourself.
> People want to get involved but when you react to their suggestions > like you have been it puts them off and sends them back out looking > for other spaces. From past customer service experience I find the > best way to get people involved is to try to figure out ways of > directing their energy and taking their suggestions and trying to get > them to help is how that works. You've been in a criticize first and > ask questions later mode for months and the only thing it does is > deter people from wanting to take some ownership of the place.
> To be honest, I think you ought to step down as docent and truly give > the space over to the Olympia community.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 7:44pm
> You need to look at your communication in this situation, Jason. I > actually didn't criticize anyone -- I responded with an analysis. You > chose to question my analysis in particularly unhelpful manner. > Perhaps you don't know this, but it's quite aggressive to ask someone > if they're telling the truth (out of the blue). Then, sticking to you > poor choice of words, you stubbornly persisted in your pejorative > characterization. Take some responsibility for the way you express > yourself. I'm perfectly willing to do the same.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:29pm
> Rick, I disagree with you. I don't think it was a poor choice of > words. I do think you think it was a poor choice of words. I also > think your response to epersonae falls into a pattern of unwillingness > to actually enter into conversation with people looking to offer > suggestions for the space.
> Here is me taking responsibility: I would not retract my comments. > Perhaps using "is that a valid analysis" would have been more accurate > than "is that really true" but the point still stands that I > fundamentally disagree with your conclusion of what our traffic shows > regarding our knowledge of how to create a thriving online community. > The Daily Olympian gets tens of thousands of hits but I would hardly > portray it as a thriving online community.
> I think you should step down as a docent. It seems that neither you > nor the users are able to divorce OlyBlog from Rick and in order for > the place to take the next step into Community ownership that really > needs to happen.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Fri, 07/18/2008 - 12:17am
> Jason,
> Your lack of ability to take responsibility for your own communication > concerns me. I'm not sure on which planet it is ok to openly > disrespect friends, but it sure isn't this one. You blundered into a > conversation with no skill, and no humility, and you continue to hold > to untenable claims.
> Your disagreement with me was what exactly? I stated in my response to > Elaine that our challenge is to create more active participation. You > claim to disagree, yet assert the same. I looked through the links > provided when they were posted, and saw nothing really applicable or > specific to our needs. You claim there is, yet provide no examples. I > can only assume from this that you're more interested in creating heat > than light.
> I object to the use of "tourist" to refer to our readership. You > strain the semantics of the word to the breaking point.
> I really wonder why you were a party to this conversation at all? I > fear you fell into the trap of defending someone else's position > (Elaine's); something that no one asked you to do, and didn't need > doing in the first place. I regret that Elaine and I were unable to > have an uninterrupted conversation.
> And finally: your suggestions are impertinent. I'll not be stepping > down as docent until such a time that there are people who will > actually show up for meetings.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Fri, 07/18/2008 - 7:42am > Rick,
> What are you talking about? From my very first post to you I > questioned your reading of the statistics as evidence that "the > challenge that we face isn't how to start or maintain a community (our > traffic shows that we are already able to do that)". Again, the > statistics show that of nearly 2000 people coming to OlyBlog every day > about .2% (1 in 400) are active in creating content. If that's your > idea of evidence that we are able to maintain a "community" then again > I refer you to The Olympian and their user statistics. If you want to > call that successful maintenance of a community then I question your > definitions. My point, once again, is that this isn't just an other > people issue, this is an issue on our part as well.
> Regarding taking responsibility: I am taking responsibility for my > communication, what I am not taking responsibility for is negative > connotations you bring to the table expecting other people to know > about. You say I strain the semantics of the word "tourist" to the > breaking point but the only thing demeaning about the term is your > claim that it's negative. From a denotational perspective you protest > too much. I referred to OlyBlog as a good tourist destination > (something any linear model would love) but again it is not my > understanding that a linear model of knowledge sharing is our goal for > community. If it is then we're a success. If it's not, then we do not > have traffic statistics showing we know how to maintain a community.
> "I looked through the links provided when they were posted, and saw > nothing really applicable or specific to our needs. You claim there > is, yet provide no examples."
> "I really wonder why you were a party to this conversation at all? I > fear you fell into the trap of defending somebody else's position > (Elaine's); something that no one asked you to do, and didn't need > doing in the first place."
> Because it is a public conversation, or are you forgetting that? And > if you go back and reread the thread I think it's pretty apparent that > the only things I actively defended were my assertion that perhaps we > could learn about activating the passive readership from some of the > links provided and my
I would like to have access to the html for the wall, or you can go retrieve it all for me. I have most of it backed up but there's still a fair amount of work I did for which I do not have the code. I published it all under the CC license.
I would accept stevenl as a mediator. I will not be posting any more content (calendar, interviews, free wall, etc.) as long as you're in charge. I had thought people's perception that this space was not community space but Rick's space was wrong. Your behavior today has shown me that I was wrong. I am not donating any more of my time to making your space more valuable.
----- Original Message ---- From: Rick McKinnon <mckinnon.r...@comcast.net> To: olyblogdocents@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 11:00:07 AM Subject: Re: a call for a docent's resignation
This is so disappointing, Jason. I had thought you were a person one could reason with, or at least trust. I find I was wrong about that on both counts.
I wish you well.
Cheers,
Rick
jason wrote:
> This is a call for a docent vote on the continued role of OlyBlog > founder Rick McKinnon.
> My vote is that Rick step down from his duties as docent and turn > OlyBlog over to the Olympia community currently invested in the space > as per his initial plan. I've been thinking about this awhile due to > the difficulties people have separating him from OlyBlog but it was > his behavior on this thread > (http://olyblog.net/starting-point-thoughts-online-community) that > made up my mind. Included with this e-mail is a private message > conversation Rick and I have been involved in since last week. As > much of the content involves OlyBlog administration I think it should > have been on the docent list for all of us to talk about from the > beginning (as previously agreed upon).
> I realize this brings more drama to the blog space and I apologize up > front about that, it is not my goal. I do this because I firmly > believe it is in the best long term interests of the OlyBlog community.
> I hope this finds you all well, > - Jason
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Dude > Date: Wed, 07/16/2008 - 10:34pm
> If you be so kind as to speak clearly about what's on your mind, I'd > be very appreciative. I'm having trouble following along with the > insinuations and allusions.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Wed, 07/16/2008 - 10:49pm
> What insinuations and allusions?
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 8:13am
> The insinuation that we are not trying to educate ourselves about how > to make this a better community. We've been doing nothing else for > three years. I really don't know where you're coming from on this.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 8:25am
> I didn't realize I was insinuating that. I think you might be taking > this all a little bit too personally.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:08am
> Perhaps you should have considered that personal feelings were > involved before choosing your words. This is not the first time that > I've thought that.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 3:12pm
> Rick, I think you're acting like a jerk. I've been thinking about > personal feelings involved, specifically I'm thinking about how shitty > it is to call you a jerk, but between these private messages and in > the epersonae stream you're coming across as a jerk. This is not the > first time I've thought that.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 4:23pm
> Back atcha, brother.
> I would have thought that you would be as sick to death as I am of > people who haven't done shit around here telling us what to do with > blog. I'm fed up with it, and I'm fed up with the attitude that you > express about how we're not building community here. That's complete > bullshit and I have no idea where it comes from. It isn't perfect -- > no one would claim it is -- but this is an experiment, so I'd like to > not be criticized for doing if fucking wrong. There is no right way!
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 6:07pm
> Nobody is criticizing you. Go take a chill pill. You keep asking > people to differentiate between the docents and the blog, so I > recommend you start recognizing the difference yourself.
> People want to get involved but when you react to their suggestions > like you have been it puts them off and sends them back out looking > for other spaces. From past customer service experience I find the > best way to get people involved is to try to figure out ways of > directing their energy and taking their suggestions and trying to get > them to help is how that works. You've been in a criticize first and > ask questions later mode for months and the only thing it does is > deter people from wanting to take some ownership of the place.
> To be honest, I think you ought to step down as docent and truly give > the space over to the Olympia community.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 7:44pm
> You need to look at your communication in this situation, Jason. I > actually didn't criticize anyone -- I responded with an analysis. You > chose to question my analysis in particularly unhelpful manner. > Perhaps you don't know this, but it's quite aggressive to ask someone > if they're telling the truth (out of the blue). Then, sticking to you > poor choice of words, you stubbornly persisted in your pejorative > characterization. Take some responsibility for the way you express > yourself. I'm perfectly willing to do the same.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:29pm
> Rick, I disagree with you. I don't think it was a poor choice of > words. I do think you think it was a poor choice of words. I also > think your response to epersonae falls into a pattern of unwillingness > to actually enter into conversation with people looking to offer > suggestions for the space.
> Here is me taking responsibility: I would not retract my comments. > Perhaps using "is that a valid analysis" would have been more accurate > than "is that really true" but the point still stands that I > fundamentally disagree with your conclusion of what our traffic shows > regarding our knowledge of how to create a thriving online community. > The Daily Olympian gets tens of thousands of hits but I would hardly > portray it as a thriving online community.
> I think you should step down as a docent. It seems that neither you > nor the users are able to divorce OlyBlog from Rick and in order for > the place to take the next step into Community ownership that really > needs to happen.
> From: Rick > To: enpen > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Fri, 07/18/2008 - 12:17am
> Jason,
> Your lack of ability to take responsibility for your own communication > concerns me. I'm not sure on which planet it is ok to openly > disrespect friends, but it sure isn't this one. You blundered into a > conversation with no skill, and no humility, and you continue to hold > to untenable claims.
> Your disagreement with me was what exactly? I stated in my response to > Elaine that our challenge is to create more active participation. You > claim to disagree, yet assert the same. I looked through the links > provided when they were posted, and saw nothing really applicable or > specific to our needs. You claim there is, yet provide no examples. I > can only assume from this that you're more interested in creating heat > than light.
> I object to the use of "tourist" to refer to our readership. You > strain the semantics of the word to the breaking point.
> I really wonder why you were a party to this conversation at all? I > fear you fell into the trap of defending someone else's position > (Elaine's); something that no one asked you to do, and didn't need > doing in the first place. I regret that Elaine and I were unable to > have an uninterrupted conversation.
> And finally: your suggestions are impertinent. I'll not be stepping > down as docent until such a time that there are people who will > actually show up for meetings.
> From: enpen > To: Rick > Subject: Re: Dude > Date: Fri, 07/18/2008 - 7:42am > Rick,
> What are you talking about? From my very first post to you I > questioned your reading of the statistics as evidence that "the > challenge that we face isn't how to start or maintain a community (our > traffic shows that we are already able to do that)". Again, the > statistics show that of nearly 2000 people coming to OlyBlog every day > about .2% (1 in 400) are active in creating content. If that's your > idea of evidence that we are able to maintain a "community" then again > I refer you to The Olympian and their user statistics. If you want to > call that successful maintenance of a community then I question your > definitions. My point, once again, is that this isn't just an other > people issue, this is an issue on our part as well.
> Regarding taking responsibility: I am taking responsibility for my > communication, what I am not taking responsibility for is negative > connotations you bring to the table expecting other people to know > about. You say I strain the semantics of the word "tourist" to the > breaking point but the only thing demeaning about the term is your > claim that it's negative. From a denotational perspective you protest > too much. I referred to OlyBlog as a good tourist destination > (something any linear model would love) but again it is not my > understanding that a linear model of knowledge sharing is our goal for > community. If it is then we're a success. If it's not, then we do not > have traffic statistics showing we know how to maintain a
|
