@biass said in Council of Setons EXPOSED - Part 1:
This election is mostly spawned from said drama. It's being spawned from the ongoing debate about the FAF Association and it's relationship to the council. FtXCommando and Sheeo have been personally at ends over this for the past few months. It is the dominating discussion in the Council chat and the root of all the "toxicity".
This election spawned from being overdue, not drama or anything regarding the association.
It was supposed to be yearly but the council failed to make that happen.
You know this very well so why are you attempting to misrepresent it?
I cannot possibly summarise the discussion to the community and I personally had different issues with the topic than FtX does. I'll just quickly go over my opinions on the matter:
- Anyone could have joined the Association and fast-tracked their way to absolute power on FAF by attending the meeting.
This is wrong.
Not just "anyone" can join; they need to be proven sympathetic to the objectives defined in the statutes.
Joining does not give you "absolute power" in any sense of the word as you also need to be elected onto the board by the rest of the association, and the board consists of at minimum 6 members.
The Association was formed by the people that showed up, and the Board was formed out of everybody who volunteered to be in it with no upper limit.
The meeting date and time was announced by FtX and FtX attended.
The only thing that stopped said Board from being overrun with bad actors was that they didnt show up.
That and the rest of the people present who don't want to engage with bad actors, as well as what's written into the statutes.
What further are you suggesting? Every other voluntary association that I know of in the world operates like this, without issue.
You have complained about this but never presented any kind of solution except "keep sheeo in power because he is permanently AFK".
I asked for there to be a Code of Conduct in the Association to prevent this, it was agreed upon but not made.
As you very well know but are again misrepresenting; I said that was not my priority. I have delegated it to the rest of the board but so far, no takers.
You were asked to explicitly provide your own input and suggestion as to this code of conduct: That hasn't happened.
- You're not allowed to know who the list of people are who now hold this power. It's been admitted to in this chat and mentioning it implies severe consequences.
I answered this earlier and you're not responding to the problem.
On May 12th - during the election period, a user quietly forwarded a number of screenshots of FtX talking about this topic and it was brought up in the council chat by Sheeo - while FtX had been kicked over prior disagreements - in an attempt to remove him out of the election entirely.
Outside of filling in your pre-made narrative what is your point here? It's awfully convenient than you can pluck sections of chat to suit your conclusions.
On a side note; please refrain from sharing the private council chat without the permission of the other councillors. Just because you have no respect for confidentiality does not mean you have the right to impose that onto the rest of the councillors.
Do you know who the board members are who now operate FAF? Would you like to know? You're not allowed. Do you know the rules of the Association or the "statutes" they're bound by?
The statutes are public and you know it. They were, in their final version announced on the 21st of March.
You are not responding to any of the problems mentioned earlier.
Do you think a councilor should be removed for trying to make FAF more transparent?
That is not what happened, unless trying to make FAF more transparent involves power-grabbing and subsequently rage-quitting from the process when that fails.
- The Council pledge that states: "I will collaborate with the FAF Board to work towards our objectives." Was created after the disagreement about how the council and board should work together. It's fundamentally binding FtX, and any other new PC to obey the new Board (who you don't know about) instead of continuing the current discussion.
It's fundamentally about binding everyone on the council to work together with the board and not impose their own authority and refuse to accept the new ownership.
If they don't want to accept that then yes, they're out.
I advocated for a number of changes to the pledges that ensure the Association are bound to actually work with contributors, here: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/519425924874371094/848399989607628810/Capture.PNG
Your suggested changes are to the statutes, not any "pledges". The statutes were accepted and cannot be changed unless you invoke the processes mentioned in those same statutes. You're welcome to go ahead and do that.
That's what was said to you as well but you refrain from showing that obviously.
Even if you suggested changes to some pledge and wanted the board to sign it: I've answered this to you in private many times and again above to FtX. But no, you cannot make the board sign some pledge to have to collaborate "on mutual terms" with the council. It is not bound to have to work with the council structure and doing so could be legally problematic.
Stop trying to grab onto your personal power in an elected position.
These were deemed "superflous" or not needed. I if want to add this change I need to forward this idea to sheeo - who left the council chat, or an association member - who i'm not technically supposed to know about. This is so they can "discuss it at a meeting" which I have not been told the date.
I left the chat after this date. Your post is from may 6th.
To give you a TL:DR, the Association is a currently a group of people who "managed to be there for the meeting", and operate FAF's functions in complete confidentiality.
Some amount of confidentiality quite simply has to exist, and it's now quite abundantly clear that a person like yourself will simply not respect that.
Despite claiming to wanting to make FAF more transparent, Emperor_Penguin has asked to join this association as of this morning. You can choose what to make of this information.
Maybe he wants to help improve FAF; per what the statutes say?
At some point during this timeline sheeo has gone to Morax and explicitly asked him to run against FtX. I know this by admission
What? No I have not. I have encouraged anybody to run for the election.
You somehow feel fine presenting all this other chat from confidential sources; so why not back this up?
you'll also notice Emperor_Penguin also admitting to being in discussion with "the president of the board" (sheeo) throughout the election thread. You can also choose what to make of this information but I don't think it's particularly acceptable for people to go into private conversations and ask people to call elections in order to vote out someone you have a disagreement with.
That's not what's happened and you are utterly misrepresenting and lying to suit your narrative here.
This is completely unacceptable.
I'm done responding to toxic hypotheticals that fit your pre-made conclusions and the narrative you are trying to feed the community.
Please read and understand the statute, get yourself a basic understanding of how voluntary associations work and then come back and make arguments with a basis in reality.