[Note: There will be 2 Q&A posts total, covering all the topics brought up during the user-submitted Q&A period. Candidates were limited to 300 words per answer.]
Some candidates mentioned internationalisation in their platforms. Where do you see the OTW at in this regard, in particular when it comes to current challenges and roadblocks?
I think the biggest goal here is to continue supporting efforts to translate the Archive. This is the area where our efforts would have the greatest impact in my opinion. I think the main challenge for it would be resources, whether it be in terms of translating the various pieces or in getting the code changed to allow for the localization remains to be seen.
The OTW has come under fire recently for not doing enough to protect fans, especially nonwhite fans from racism. How would you address this issue and how would you balance not policing darkfic creators with not allowing thinly-veiled harassment, or singling out people of color/their allies unfairly?
My general opinion is that the archive is, at its core, an archive. Maximum inclusivity of content is a cornerstone of our mission and the terms of service. No matter where we draw this line (if it is drawn at all) there are going to be people not satisfied with the outcome. Further, it’s outside of the scope of the Board to direct this discussion or dictate content policy, except to advocate for our goal of maximum inclusivity of content wherever possible. We should facilitate and support the relevant parties (Policy & Abuse, Legal, etc) in creating sustainable and enforceable policies where (if) possible that can address these situations. Additionally, I think we should continue to develop tools that enable fans to curate their own experience on the Archive, in addition to encouraging users to use those we’ve already released.
What would you like to see the OTW do going forward to protect fans and volunteers from parts of the world under peril (e.g., Congo, Palestine, Sudan)?
This is entirely outside of the scope of the Board of Directors or the organisation as a whole. Our mission is to “[provide] access to and [preserve] the history of fanworks and fan culture in its myriad forms.” We are not a humanitarian aid organisation. The only thing that we really can do is continue to serve our mission, thereby providing fans in such areas places to escape to when or if possible.
With the looming risk of Project 2025, what are your proposals to protect writers’ freedom of expression?
I would encourage you to direct your questions to the Legal Committee who can best elaborate on how the organisation can influence such policy (if at all). Legal strategy and advocacy are outside of the scope of the Board of Directors.
Censorship law is on the rise in the US. Do you have a strategy to mobilize the legal team to try and prevent it from impacting Ao3’s usability?
I would encourage you to direct your questions to the Legal Committee who can best elaborate on how the organisation can influence such policy (if at all). Legal strategy and advocacy are outside of the scope of the Board of Directors.
What are your opinions on censorship, specifically limiting what kind of works creators can share (loli/shota, noncon, studentxteacher, incest, beastiality, etc)
Much as I said in the earlier question, I strongly believe in our goals of maximum inclusivity for the Archive. I believe that it is the Board of Directors’ responsibility to advocate for that goal during discussions regarding content policy and how it can be enforced. Unless content is otherwise in violation of other clauses of the Terms of Service, then as far as I’m concerned, it will always have a home on the Archive.
What will you do to protect fanworks from being stolen by AI content farms for profit on YouTube, etc?
The OTW does not own the copyright for fanworks hosted on the Archive – you do! This means that if works are taken from the Archive and used in ways that you do not approve of, it is up to you to enforce your rights. If you have questions regarding those rights and how to handle some general situations, I’d encourage you to reach out to the Legal Committee who can (probably) address some of your concerns.
As far as what we can do to prevent this… logistically, it’s impossible. This problem hasn’t been solved yet by anyone in a myriad of industries, we’re certainly not going to.
otwarchive and AO3 have been in beta since 2008. The AO3 roadmap was last updated in 2013. Version 0.9.0 was released in 2012. What is your position on exiting beta in terms of organizational will, timeline, and operational improvements required to reach 1.0?
Feature prioritisation and development of the otwarchive package are outside of the scope of the Board of Directors broadly speaking. Personally, I don’t care about whether the archive is still in beta status now or in 5 years as long as we are continually developing and improving the package. While I do think that we would be well served to create an updated roadmap in a more accessible location, which illustrates major feature improvements we would like to make in the future, I understand the reservations of the people most involved in that and the challenges it creates.
Any candidate here who will try to implement a statistical breakdown of views/kudos/comments on chapter per chapter basis like the “other” site? I feel like that would complete this site. Also, it would allow authors to better understand their strengths and weaknesses. That will be so cool 🙂
I would encourage you to direct your questions to the Support Committee who can best speak on how feature requests such as these are prioritised or if this has already been requested. Feature prioritisation and development of the otwarchive package are outside of the scope of the Board of Directors.
Every single answer is “this is outside the scope of the Board of Directors” lol