briar_pipe
I’m going to start the official chat now, so after this, everything will be in the transcript.
Hi everyone, and welcome to our candidate chats! My name is briar_pipe and I’m a member of the Elections Committee. I’ll be hosting today.
This is the second in a series of five 90-minute-long chats with our Board candidates – the candidates present today are Alex Tischer, Aline Carrão, and Andrea Horbinski. The purpose of these chats is to see how candidates interact, both with each other and the public, and to give OTW volunteers and members a chance to ask questions not already covered in their manifestos, bios, and Q&A, as well as to ask individual questions of specific candidates. Transcripts of this chat will be posted publicly on our website.
We welcome all questions, subject to the following restrictions:
- Raise your hand to speak, like this: o/. You will be called on when it is your turn to speak. Use /done when you’re finished asking your question.
- Specify who your question is for, or if it’s for all candidates.
- Refer to everyone in the room by the name given in the sidebar for them. Don’t use other names you may know them by.
- Please keep questions reasonable and polite (these are our expectations:
https://elections.transformativeworks.org/node/534 ). - Make sure your question is not a repeat of one already answered in the manifestos ( http://transformativeworks.org/news/board-candidate-manifestos-qa-and-chats ) or the Q&A ( http://transformativeworks.org/news/elections-2014-qa-and-chats ). If it’s a follow-up to one of those, please say so.
This information is also located in the room topic in the sidebar, via the link to our website.
briar_pipe
To start us off, does anyone have a question?
elmyra
o/
Trey C
o/
briar_pipe
Ok, let’s start with elmyra, then we’ll go to Trey.
After that, we have a question that was sent in to elections staff, so we’ll do that one third.
elmyra
Thanks! Question for all the candidates. The OTW has been getting some very bad press within various corners of fandom recently: the fundraising drive (both messaging and its timing in relation to the elections), the way Nikisha Sanders was disqualified from standing for election, the absence of budget. Some of you have spoken elsewhere about addressing some of the underlying issues. Can you please talk a bit about how you would go about addressing the legitimate questions being asked and restoring the organisation’s credibility and reputation? /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, elmyra! The candidates will be typing for a couple of minutes.
Alex T.
Yeah, I know that the OTW has been getting some pretty bad press all over the place lately. Addressing those questions openly and having as much of the discussion about those subject in public would be pretty high on my list to start resolving the issues and hopefully resorting the org’s credibility and reputation. We need to be approachable and be seen taking those concerns seriously. I think the guys yesterday had some pretty good answers to that question, to be honest /done
Aline C.
As you said, the main point is addressing the underlying issues, there will always be questions from fandom and we have to do our best to address them and be forthcoming with information. The fundraising questions, for example, were not new, we have been getting these kind of questions for at least the last 3 drives. We need to prepare in advance, have concrete information and be ready to answer questions and justify our decisions. I’m a big fan of the approach the AO3 development team has take in the last few years announcing big changes and upcoming news, this gives time to people to get used to changes and also to settle any debating around it and I believe other parts of the OTW could adopt a similar approach. /done
Andrea H.
It’s not entirely accurate to say that we don’t have a budget; we have a draft budget for 2016 that was reviewed at the annual meeting in Vancouver earlier this month and which the current Treasurer is hard at work finalizing. We also did have a 2014 budget which was approved in an open meeting in 2014 Q3. While there is nothing wrong with having a fundraising drive or asking for people’s support to do our work, the timing of this past drive with respect to the election voting deadline was definitely somewhat unfortunate. However, that is a problem that won’t happen again as Elections and Legal are working together to fix the date for the election each calendar year. Finally, I think bad press is an inevitable consequence of almost any action given the reality of how many people there are on the internet and the fact that by definition the vast majority of them aren’t familiar with the details of the OTW’s operations. That said, we’ve come a long way in the past eight years and I think the best way to overcome bad press is to keep building a strong organization that has great projects that people know and love, and also to continue working to extend the organization’s recognition beyond the current areas where we’re well-known. /done
briar_pipe
elmyra, I’ll give you a moment to read, but did you have any follow-up questions?
elmyra
thanks, no follow-up. thank you all.
/done
briar_pipe
Thanks, elmyra!
Trey, what was your question?
Trey C
My question is for Andrea: shortly after the list of this year’s candidates were posted, the Board announced Nikisha Sanders’ removal from her role as Treasurer of the OTW. Given the impact on a fellow candidate, did you recuse yourself from taking part in this decision? /done
Andrea H.
Nikisha Sanders’ letter of resignation was dated before the candidacy deadline. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks! Trey, do you have a follow-up?
Trey C
I do! Let me just formulate.
briar_pipe
Sure, please do!
Sofia
o/ (not realted to Trey’s question)
(*related)
Trey C
The discussion regarding Sanders’ DevMem staff vs Board member ex officio status that ultimately led to the conclusion that she was no longer an OTW member—it is my understanding, given Sanders’ public statements on the subject, that that took place after she declared her candidacy. Did you recuse yourself from these discussions, given that they had a direct impact on the candidacy of a fellow candidate and OTW volunteer? Apologies for the delay! /done
Andrea H.
typing, hang on, sorry!
Sanni L.
o/
briar_pipe
The order now is the question submitted to Elections earlier, Sofia, then Sanni.
Andrea H.
Thanks for the follow-up. I can’t actually comment specifically on anything related to the matter you’re referring to due to directors’ legal duty to safeguard the organization. That said, I have in the past and will continue to abstain from votes in which I have a COI, and it is the expectation that other directors will do the same. One of the things we discussed at the annual meeting was requiring annual COI disclosures from directors rather than just when they start their terms, to make the COI process more familiar to people. /done
briar_pipe
Trey, any further follow-ups?
Trey C
Nope, that was all. Thank you for your response! /done
briar_pipe
Thanks! Next up, I’ll paste the question we received earlier in its exact form.
This question is also for Andrea.
“http://transformativeworks.org//about/reports/board-meeting-minutes-13-december-2014
“Andrea Horbinski apologized publicly for her unprofessional conduct. Eylul Dogruel apologized on behalf of the Board and offered her assurances as
incoming President that the matter has been dealt with.”
Could you please elaborate on this instance from the board notes?”
Andrea H.
Thanks for the question. The minutes are referring to the previous meeting, in which I lost my temper with a staffer in a manner that was wholly uncalled for. My fellow directors called me on it immediately, and I apologized to the staffer directly over email the next day–this meeting began at 23:00 on Saturday night Tokyo time. The staffer in question accepted my apology, and Eylul and I reiterated the apology in the next public session for the record, which is what you see there in the minutes. It’s definitely not something I’m proud of, and as it says in the minutes, I regret my unprofessional conduct. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, Andrea!
Sofia, you’ve been waiting patiently. What was your question?
Sofia
Okay, I would like to ask something on a lighter note to all candidates (I also apologize if this sounds like a repetition of anything already asked in the Q&A). If elected, what do you look forward to the most over your three-year term on the Board?
oh, and /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, Sofia! We’ll wait a moment while everyone types.
briar_pipe
Hi to everyone who’s joined us in the past few minutes! The introduction is here, if you can get the site to load: https://elections.transformativeworks.org/node/535
Carli A.
o/
C. Ryan Smith
o/
Andrea H.
Thanks for the question. It’s been a real pleasure to serve on the Board this year thanks to the professionalism and energy of my colleagues, and the thing I look forward to most about serving for another term (if elected) is the continued opportunity to work with them and with other incoming directors to continue to use my skills and experience to help guide the OTW’s ongoing growth and expansion. I’m also, after a three-year process drafting it, looking forward to undertaking the work of implementing the strategic plan! /done
Aline C.
I look forward to helping improve the internal atmosphere and the experience all volunteers have inside the organization. I have made a lot of friends since joining Translation, inside and outside the committee, and that is one of the reasons we’re all still around and working so hard to make the OTW what it is. Making volunteering in the OTW a positive experience and helping make this an enjoyable work environment is something I truly believe should be one of our goals going forward. This may take structural changes, tool changes, procedural changes, efforts big and small, but it’s worth it. /done
Alex T.
I would actually be pretty happy if we managed to improve org’s reputation in the next few years. We are actually a pretty amazing org, but it has been overshadowed by a lot of infighting and poor PR decisions in the last few years so that it is hard to see and enjoy any more /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, everyone! Sofia, do you have any follow-up questions?
Sofia
No, I’ll refrain from any follow ups, thank you! /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, Sofia! Next up is Sanni, then Carli, then Ryan. Sanni?
Sanni L.
My question is for Andrea. According to the policy that the Board approved in August 2014, candidates have to be “a current staffer on a standing committee in the OTW” to run for Board. Are you currently serving in any committees? /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, Sanni! We’ll let Andrea work on that one.
Andrea H.
Thanks for the question. The Board previously received this query, as did Legal. It has always been the policy of the org that Board service is the same as serving on a committee, so this requirement is satisfied by my service on the Board. /done
james_
o/
briar_pipe
Sanni, do you have a follow-up question?
Sanni L.
Thank you for the answer! No follow ups.
briar_pipe
Thanks! Ok, Carli is next, then Ryan, then james.
Carli A.
Just to avoid confusion that may result from a candidate’s statement, Elections is currently working on improvements to bylaws, but we are not looking to establish a fixed election date. We are focusing on the membership deadline.
Andrea H.
Also, just as a follow-up to Carli’s follow-up, fixing the election date is an idea that Board has discussed adopting as part of fixing the membership deadline. /done
briar_pipe
Ok, thanks for that clarification, Carli!
Ryan, did you have a question?
C. Ryan Smith
In the past, I’ve heard of other volunteers/staff/committees/users/random-passerby expressing dissatisfaction with our current fundraising model (not as related to budget woes or “pulling a target figure out of thin air”). The lead-up to fund drives currently is a huge effort that often times spans committees and into Board. What would you like to see from future fund raising efforts (including but not limited to fund drives)? (PS: I’m talking more about broad strokes changes to our fund raising strategy; for some examples: would you advocate us abandoning the biannual drives in favor of other methods, would you advocate changing how we publicize the drives, or would you advocate for a more open fund drive development process?) /done
(PPS: Don’t feel obligated to answer those specific examples, by the way!) /really done this time
briar_pipe
Thanks, Ryan! It may take a couple minutes for candidates to type their answers.
Alex T.
I don’t think twice yearly fund drives are a bad idea per se, but I do think the execution could be improved a lot. What our users seem to want is answers to very simple questions in the end. Why are we asking for money? What have we done with the last money we raised? What are we planning to do with the money we would raise now? If we streamline our drives to cover those questions and have a banner up on the Archive we will receive donations. All the windowdressing of themed posts is not really necessary in my opinion.
I know there has been the idea of running our fundraising more like wikipedia thrown around but I think using that level of geolocation is a bit beyond our current size, especially considering the drives are OTW wide events and not just the Archive. /done
Aline C.
I’m not sure just moving away from biannual fund drives in one move would be a safe thing, since it is what pays our bills right now. But I do believe there is a lot of strategies we could use alongside it and even, in the future, doing away with it. I don’t think this should come exclusively from board, but from all committees involved in executing the decisions (devmem, comms, translation, ad&t) but I’m very open to talk about new ideas. One idea I always liked personally is making our donation gifts more interesting and attractive (things like limited edition t-shirts, maybe reach out for signed material from fandom-friendly authors and actors, downloadable content for smaller donations) as one way to incentivize donations while making the people helping us feel like they are getting something nice back too. /done
Andrea H.
Thanks for the question. I think the current model has been serving our current needs pretty well, thanks to a lot of hard work from a lot of people in the Org, with DevMem at the front of that list. Fundraising is a huge amount of work for any non-profit, and I think there’s a certain amount of it that just isn’t going to go away no matter what kind of model we adopted. I’d also like to see ways to get more OTW personnel involved in the fundraising drives overall, which we discussed a bit at the annual meeting as ideas to think about for the future–with 500 staffers, that’s a huge social network multiplier effect that we could be taking advantage of!
All that being said, I’ve talked a bit in other places about how the OTW and the AO3 are now in a relationship to each other that is quite like the one between the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikipedia, and while the AO3 isn’t the OTW’s only project, it is definitely the lead project in terms of visibility and in terms of fundraising impact. That’s a position that has some very positive pros and some very large potential downsides as well, and I think the Board would like, as we discussed at the annual meeting, to eventually move to a fundraising model in which our individual donors, whom we love, are not our only source of operating funds. The natural other choice there is probably institutional funders (i.e. foundations), because corporations just are never going to like what we do very much under the current IP regime. And as AO3 costs continue to grow, I expect that we’ll eventually need to adopt the Wikimedia fundraising model of continuous, targeted fundraising, though that’s definitely a ways off in terms of the infrastructure needed to pull it off successfully, as well as the budget requirements that would make it absolutely necessary. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, everyone! While Ryan reads through those, james, would you like to ask your question? Then I’ll come back to Ryan to check for follow-ups.
C. Ryan Smith
No follow-ups briar, thanks! And thank you to all the candidates for the answers! <3
james_
From http://transformativeworks.org//about/reports/board-meeting-minutes-02-october-2015
“Discussion of Elections goal: ideally in the future Elections will understand the bylaws, and also will take a more active role in moderating the Q&A for candidates for clarity and respect.”
Do the candidates believe that electios has misunderstood the bylaws, do you believe that candidates should be censored?
Alex T.
I don’t believe that Elections has misunderstood the bylaws, nor do I think Board should try to influence the Elections committee in any way, let alone censor the candidates. /done
Andrea H.
I don’t believe that Elections has misunderstood the bylaws, or that candidates should be censored. /done
Aline C.
No, I don’t believe questions or candidates should be censored, the process of the Q&A was long and draining, but Elections was helpful and prompt during all of it and I’m very happy with their work. I also do not believe elections misunderstood the bylaws. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, everyone! Does anyone else have questions at this time?
teecee
o/
sbarmarj
o/
james_
Can I have a supplementary
briar_pipe
Ah, sorry. Of course, james!
james_
I think that Sanders has been mistreated in this afair. Do you trust the electorate to vote wisely in this election ?
briar_pipe
Then teecee.
Aline C.
I hope the electorate look through the information they have available and make a wise choice, but one can only hope xD /done
Andrea H.
I do trust the OTW membership. /done
Alex T.
I agree that Sanders has been mistreated in this instance. I certainly hold no particular fondness for her, but the whole process was underhanded. I would hope the membership can see that too and will vote accordingly /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, everyone! Any further follow-ups, james?
james_
Done, Are the transcripts of these going on the web site ?
briar_pipe
Yes, they are.
Thanks, james! teecee, what was your question?
teecee
For everyone: People on FFA/Tumblr have been pointing out the lack of transparency in the OTW, specifically in regards to Board. As a Board member, what practical steps do you think need to be taken to improve transparency?
Alex T.
I’m just going to c&p from the Q&A on Transparency for that if that’s ok?
Having an up-to-date agenda available on the wiki and the website, extensive minutes in both places, and making open Board meetings the standard place to come to decisions — to a degree where a closed section of the meeting would not even take place unless required for confidentiality would be a good start towards transparency.
A transparent Board to me means that any and all discussions and votes that do not concern strictly confidential information are made in a place where people from outside the Board can follow along. Where this is not feasible (because discussions take place on a mailing list or for other practical reasons), the important points are summed up understandably, with the necessary context, and made available in a timely fashion. It’s important for there to be information available about ongoing discussions, and for the reasoning behind Board’s actions and decisions. /done
Aline C.
Also copying from the Q&A :
A transparent board communicates openly with the rest of the org, documents and justifies their decisions, and listens to feedback from everyone involved. In practical terms, this means being held accountable to the same degree that committees already are: the board should do regular reports about what they’re planning and working on; keep up-to-date and comprehensible minutes; set clear requirements for their roles and ensure that these requirements are met; document responsibilities and goals; and have open meetings where relevant topics are actually discussed in-depth and not just voted on pro forma.
elmyra
o/ (if no one else who hasn’t already asked something has a question)
C. Ryan Smith
o/ (follow up to teecee)
Andrea H.
Thanks for the question. Transparency is an active and difficult process, and I think some people will be satisfied with nothing less than full and total disclosure of every item related to the OTW’s operations, no matter how small. Unfortunately, we can’t give that to them, since we as the Board have legal responsibilities to the organization that require us to keep a lot of information related to the organization’s operations confidential. I think at this point one thing that we as the Board need to do is try to educate the OTW membership about what confidentiality means in the context of a non-profit so that they can have more reasonable expectations about transparency, as well as understand better why we often can’t tell them everything they want to know. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks! teecee, do you have a follow-up yourself?
teecee
not at this time, thanks.
briar_pipe
Thanks!
sbarmarj
(I raised my hand previously right after teecee. Am I in the que?)
briar_pipe
In the interests of fairness, I want to make sure our last questions go in order.
So that folks who raised their hands first, like sbarmarj, can be sure to get a reply. 🙂
So the order right now is sbarmarj, elmyra, and Ryan.
What was your question, sbarmarj?
sbarmarj
Great. Question for everyone and builds on teecee’s question. In recent weeks individual board members as well as the board as a whole have been public criticized for their actions. I assume that individual members, and the Board as an entity, have not responded to these criticism because of confidentiality policies. As board members how do you plan to handle public criticism that you can not respond to because of your duty to the org?
Alex T.
Public criticism is an unavoidable thing. There will be criticism and I would try to address it as openly as any confidentiality policies allow and would clearly state where my answer stops because of those confidentiality policies.
The important thing, in my opinion, is to show that you’ve heard the criticism and actually considered it, not just brushed it off as irrelevant. /done
Aline C.
I believe the best way to deal with those cases is answering as far as you can, and explaining why you can’t be more forthcoming at the moment. Being extra careful to not sound dismissive or like we are only acting pro forma in our answers. /done
Andrea H.
Thanks for the question. Being unable to respond to public criticism due to the need to safeguard the organization is definitely one of the hardest parts of being a director, because there’s literally nothing we can do except ignore it–confidentiality means that directors can’t discuss certain things with anyone except each other and at times the organization’s counsel. It’s simply the way things are, and it’s part of what makes the job really stressful at times. /done
sbarmarj
I have a follow up
briar_pipe
Sure, please go ahead!
sbarmarj
This is specifically for Alex and Aline: you have in fact done some of the denouncing and have implied in your answers here that current board members have behaved unprofessionally for decisions you were not privy to. How do you plan to work with returning board members if you are elected?
Alex T.
Professionally. How else would I work with them? We are adults and even if we disagree we have to work with each other. That means adhering to basic rules of politeness and professionalism. /done
Aline C.
I do disagree with a lot of the decisions made by the institution board recently, but don’t attribute any of my criticism to individual people inside the board, a lot of it has been leftover from past members and conflicts, and pointing fingers will not help us move foward. That said, carrying our own perceptions and grudges to a new setting is an inevitable part of being human, I’m aware of it and committed to not let this interfere with my work. Adopting a professional position and an open mind is the best way we can get past any problem we had in the past and work together to improve the OTW. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, guys!
Ok, in order to fit the last 2 questions in: elmyra, can you post your question, then Ryan also post yours?
That way, when candidates finish with one question, they can start on the next.
And those will be the last ones we have time for today.
C. Ryan Smith
Sure.
elmyra
Thanks briar_pipe. Question for all candidates. Do you feel we have an issue with losing talent, and what, if anything, would you do to retain and attract talent, or to re-engage good people who may have left for one reason or another?
briar_pipe
Thank you both!
To everyone, we’ll be running over about 5-6 minutes.
Apologies for the length.
Transcripts will be posted within the next couple of days, if the website will stay up long enough for us to do so.
Alex T.
I don’t think Board as an entity has (or should have, really) many ways of influencing the retention or attraction of talent and people. That is the job of the committees and all Board can do is to support the committees in that task. Because the different committees require such different skill sets, it is hard to come up with a plan that fits all but trying to lower the work load of committee chairs so they can concentrate on doing just that would be a first step./done
Andrea H.
Thanks for the question. Volunteer retention is something that all volunteer organizations struggle with, and while we emphatically did have an issue with burnout in the past, I think we’ve seen that taper off somewhat over the past year or so, which is great. I think the new recruitment procedures VolCom instituted have done a lot to help the OTW attract new talent, and I expect that we will continue to do so as the strategic plan is implemented and even more documentation is written, purviews are clarified, etc. In a lot of my conversations with former volunteers over the years I’ve seen that they don’t want to come back, and that is a completely understandable decision. But for those who do, the new recruitment procedures should make it even easier for them to do so in a way that makes it even easier to match their skills and interests to the work of a particular committee. /done
Aline C.
We have lost very good people in the past, for a variety of reasons, retention will always be a problem for the OTW it’s in the nature of volunteer work and most organizations deal with it. I believe there are measures we can take to minimize this loss and make sure we have new people coming in that can take over. Mostly through improving the volunteering experience, creating social bonds between volunteers besides the work and making sure no job relies on only one individual. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, guys!
While they work on answers to Ryan’s question, elmyra, did you have a follow-up?
elmyra
no follow-up, thanks. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks!
Transcriber’s Note: C. Ryan Smith’s question has been moved from immediately after elmyra’s question to immediately above the candidate replies, in order to make it more obvious what the candidates are replying to. Apologies for any confusion.
C. Ryan Smith
To everyone: Building off of previous questions about transparency, what would you all consider “confidential matters?” Given the closed door nature of many Board dealings to which we are not (at this time or ever may be) privy to, it is possible that “our” definition of something eligible as a “confidential matter” and the Board’s current (legal or otherwise) definition might be two separate things. (To Alex & Aline specifically) Do you feel that your stance might change on what would constitute a “confidential matter” should you be elected to the Board and figure out exactly what our current “confidential matters” are? (two questions, sorry!)
Alex T.
I do think that our definition of what counts as confidential is significantly different from Board’s. I have no way of guaranteeing that my stance on what counts as confidential would not change should I be elected, but in general I err on the side of transparency and only treat as confidential what has to be done so for legal reasons, in my real life job as well as any of the organisations I am a member of. /done
Aline C.
This is a hard question to answer without having access to what is considered confidential matter at this point. But the fact we can’t even clearly say what exactly is confidential matter shows to me something needs to change. But as a rule, I have an approach of treating everything as open as legally possible. /done
Andrea H.
Thanks for the question. The Board is definitely aware that the popular understanding of confidentiality doesn’t match with the legal definition of the same, and we’ve begun discussing ways to clarify the latter. Anything relating to personnel decisions, the details of the finances, information that may leave the organization in a vulnerable position should it become public knowledge, and anything that the public doesn’t have a compelling need to know all fit under the definition of “confidential matters.” I’m sure Legal would also be happy to explain what has to remain confidential in greater detail, since as the organization’s counsel safeguarding the OTW legally is part of their purview. /done
briar_pipe
Thanks, everyone!
Ok, we are 10 minutes over, so unfortunately, I’ll need to bring us to a close.
C. Ryan Smith
Thanks for the answers!
syllic
Thanks!
briar_pipe
Alex and Aline are able to stay for a few minutes after to casually chat, if anyone’s interested. Unfortunately, Andrea has to run.
Thank you all for coming!
I declare this chat officially concluded.