chair jockey

"threats of resignation"

Recommended Posts

chair jockey   
chair jockey

I just found a very interesting new post in a part of the forum some members might not check or read, so I thought I'd link it here as it's closed for comments:

 

What's interesting is a bit of the way down, and it refers to "problems" that the admod team has had with "threats of resignation." What this seems to mean is an admod saying they will resign if a particular action is taken. It's worded to make it sound like the "threat" is intended to coerce the rest of the team into changing a decision it has made, and therefore, from now on, for an admod to say that they will resign if a particular action is taken constitutes an offense under the admod code of conduct and causes the admod to be subject to a disciplinary review, presumably by admins.

 

While I can understand concern about real coercion by means of threat of resignation, shouldn't there be room for an admod to state, politely and constructively, that a specific decision would be a deal-breaker in terms of their being able to support AVEN as a member of the AVEN team? In romantic relationships a deal-breaker is something you tell your prospective partner about BEFORE the relationships starts because that's the only way to be fair to them. Isn't it really the same thing with admods disagreeing over a decision, where the team has a right to know whether something is a deal-breaker for a team member before a decision is made? Obviously this can't happen before someone becomes an admod, as there are far too many possibilities that might not be foreseeable the way deal-breakers in relationships are foreseeable, so the right time to do it would be when a relevant situation comes up but before a decision is made. Or so it seems to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Puck   
Puck

But AVEN isn't a relationship and the goal of decisions isn't to keep staff in their staff positions, it is to make AVEN the best site it can be.

 

Staff should always have that in mind and if they disagree strongly enough with something, they are welcome to step down, but the other staff members should always be focused on making the best choice they can, not just allowing themselves to be threatened into making a choice. No one staff member is more important than AVEN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chair jockey   
chair jockey
1 minute ago, Puck said:

But AVEN isn't a relationship and the goal of decisions isn't to keep staff in their staff positions, it is to make AVEN the best site it can be.

 

Staff should always have that in mind and if they disagree strongly enough with something, they are welcome to step down, but the other staff members should always be focused on making the best choice they can, not just allowing themselves to be threatened into making a choice. No one staff member is more important than AVEN.

Fair enough. But you still have a situation where someone is forced to spring a surprise resignation on you after a decision is carried out because the rules forbid them to tell you about it in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Achromatic Kitty   
Achromatic Kitty

I have to agree with both sides on this, Puck and CJ...

 

The only CoC I could find is this: https://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/161151-staff-code-of-conduct/?tab=comments#comment-1062447305

 

Unless there is another I can't find, I'll save my thoughts on how each of you are correct and incorrect on the situation at hand...

 

I'm going to be the Devil's Advocate here when I get more info.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Puck   
Puck
21 minutes ago, chair jockey said:

Fair enough. But you still have a situation where someone is forced to spring a surprise resignation on you after a decision is carried out because the rules forbid them to tell you about it in advance.

They can still make their argument in the thread.

 

I also believe that, in practice, this rule makes less staff step down due to such disagreements because they know the only way to get future policies passed and so forth is to not step down. Resigning is not a tool that can be used to enact change on AVEN, so staff doesn't use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Achromatic Kitty   
Achromatic Kitty
7 minutes ago, Puck said:

I also believe that, in practice, this rule makes less staff step down due to such disagreements because they know the only way to get future policies passed and so forth is to not step down.

I agree Puck, but I don't think "Resigning" is what we should call it now... I believe, and correct if I'm wrong, that it's technically a protest of sorts... A manipulative one at that...

 

The reason I believe it is is because they are threating to resign over a petty disaggreement it seems, instead of actually staing their problem and dealing with it the proper way like an adult. Correct me if I'm jumping the gun so to speak, Puck....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb   
daveb

Well, that seems pretty clear to me. If people feel they can't abide by that code of conduct then maybe they shouldn't run for office? I don't see how threats are ever okay. If someone joins the team I would hope they would be mature enough to treat others with respect. If the team makes a decision they object so strongly they feel they can't continue in their position they can certainly step down, but threatening to step down if or because a decision is being made is not the kind of behavior I would want to see from an admod. Stating that a decision in progress could be a deal-breaker can be seen as an implied threat. They're still basically saying that if the decision is made they will step down. Anyway, when someone becomes an admod don't they agree to abide by decisions made by the team? If that's a deal-breaker then I return to my statement that maybe they shouldn't run for admod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lady Girl   
Lady Girl

It's been this way for awhile and it's just today been made into its own thread so the Code of Conduct is more visible. Some time ago I posted it in mod and admin roles. Staff members are definitely allowed to say they are not happy with a decision...a threat of resignation just can't accompany that post. They can also post a resignation post and state that the decision they didn't like is their reason for resigning.

 

I think it's a fair and totally reasonable rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jayce   
Jayce

Threathening to resign is not okay/unprofessional.

 

Saying you're thinking about resigning is okay

 

A staff member can post a resignation letter anytime they decide  to resign due to circumstancial issues. 

 

It's just how you present your resignation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Achromatic Kitty   
Achromatic Kitty
5 minutes ago, daveb said:

Well, that seems pretty clear to me. If people feel they can't abide by that code of conduct then maybe they shouldn't run for office? I don't see how threats are ever okay. If someone joins the team I would hope they would be mature enough to treat others with respect. If the team makes a decision they object so strongly they feel they can't continue in their position they can certainly step down, but threatening to step down if or because a decision is being made is not the kind of behavior I would want to see from an admod. Stating that a decision in progress could be a deal-breaker can be seen as an implied threat. They're still basically saying that if the decision is made they will step down. Anyway, when someone becomes an admod don't they agree to abide by decisions made by the team? If that's a deal-breaker then I return to my statement that maybe they shouldn't run for admod.

Actually... I think you should be the Devil's Advocate buddy... I submit defeat at your logic... I can't find anything wrong with the above... ^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chair jockey   
chair jockey

Every member of a team is tacitly endorsing decisions the team makes by remaining a member of the team. Moreover, any member of the team may be called upon to defend a decision to outsiders, when they happen to disagree with the decision and may even have voted against it but been outvoted. Sometimes that puts people in an impossible position and they have to resign in order to keep their sanity. Both @daveb and @Puck have employment experience that would make them aware of the truth of what I've just said. So why are people insisting that anyone who says they will resign if a specific decision is made, is somehow being childish and unreasonable? I don't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb   
daveb
2 minutes ago, chair jockey said:

why are people insisting that anyone who says they will resign if a specific decision is made, is somehow being childish and unreasonable?

Because they should just step down. Not make it a threat. Threats are an attempt to coerce others. That's not acceptable in this context (nor other contexts, for that matter).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jayce   
Jayce
5 minutes ago, chair jockey said:

Every member of a team is tacitly endorsing decisions the team makes by remaining a member of the team. Moreover, any member of the team may be called upon to defend a decision to outsiders, when they happen to disagree with the decision and may even have voted against it but been outvoted. Sometimes that puts people in an impossible position and they have to resign in order to keep their sanity. Both @daveb and @Puck have employment experience that would make them aware of the truth of what I've just said. So why are people insisting that anyone who says they will resign if a specific decision is made, is somehow being childish and unreasonable? I don't get it.

Circumstancial issues shouldn't count as a valid arguement to threat about resigning as per higher standards, it's simply not okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chair jockey   
chair jockey
2 minutes ago, daveb said:

Because they should just step down. Not make it a threat. Threats are an attempt to coerce others. That's not acceptable in this context (nor other contexts, for that matter).

All right, fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Achromatic Kitty   
Achromatic Kitty

I kinda am going to state some things I agree with and don't agree with:

 

10 minutes ago, Jayce said:

Threathening to resign is not okay/unprofessional.

 

Saying you're thinking about resigning is okay

 

A staff member can post a resignation letter anytime they decide  to resign due to circumstancial issues. 

 

It's just how you present your resignation.

 

 

Jayce here is correct. For example, if I was a boss of my own company and some young hothead was threating to sue me because I fired him for not doing his job and making the other employees uncomfortable by their constant conflicts with employees, do you think his threat would be taken seriously by a juddge? No it won't, it will be viewed as childish and VERY unprofessional...

 

6 minutes ago, daveb said:

Because they should just step down. Not make it a threat. Threats are an attempt to coerce others. That's not acceptable in this context (nor other contexts, for that matter).

I agree. That's called manipulation FYI... -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Achromatic Kitty   
Achromatic Kitty

I disagree that that they could step down without this having to happen.

 

They obliviously have some issues that need to be be worked out, and going to extremes is not what you Mods want I'm guessing?

 

Look, I think the best course of action is to wait and see if they are ACTUALLY serious about their threats or not... See if they follow through with resigning. If they don't, then it proves they were bluffing the entire time, and just wanted a reaction.

 

Am i making sense? I hope I am...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yato   
Yato

I'm pretty sure if someone threatened to resign, to overturn an ruling and or procedure. They would promptly be ignored and or questioned by the team. If they tried anything actively against it. They would be demodded, for abuse of power. 

 

It is like law enforcement. You have to abide by the rules, and can't just shoot criminals as you deem fit. You win some, you lose some. It is all part of the job. 

 

After becoming a mod, I have zero issue with a lot of how things are run. Though I might disagree with some of the rules' existences, but overall it functions as efficiently as it can, for what it is. It is far more fair, then let us say. Individual modding, at individual's discretion. Individual discretion leads to a far more unpleasant and unforgiving atmosphere. 

 

I see it, as a lot of the time with resignations. The admods have real life to deal with because shit happens, and I say more power to them for dedicating as much time as they did to begin with. This is a non-paying job after all. Many people make sacrifices most would never do for free. Admods are incredibly hard working, and dedicated and deserve far more respect for all the shit they put up with on a day to day basis. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Achromatic Kitty   
Achromatic Kitty
21 minutes ago, Yato said:

I'm pretty sure if someone threatened to resign, to overturn an ruling and or procedure. They would promptly be ignored and or questioned by the team. If they tried anything actively against it. They would be demodded, for abuse of power. 

 

It is like law enforcement. You have to abide by the rules, and can't just shoot criminals as you deem fit. You win some, you lose some. It is all part of the job. 

 

After becoming a mod, I have zero issue with a lot of how things are run. Though I might disagree with some of the rules' existences, but overall it functions as efficiently as it can, for what it is. It is far more fair, then let us say. Individual modding, at individual's discretion. That leads to a far more unpleasant and unforgiving atmosphere. 

 

I see it, as a lot of the time with resignations. The admods have real life to deal with because shit happens, and I say more power to them for dedicating as much time as they did to begin with. This is a non-paying job after all. Many people make sacrifices most would never do for free. Admods are incredibly hard working, and dedicated and deserve far more respect for all the shit they put up with on a day to day basis. 

I agree, Yato. You guys deserve respect. I'm being truthful that I don't agree with every Mod... I agree with some, and disagree with others, but I make it an example to live by when I say you deserve respect. You make sacrifices most of us may never know...

 

I also agree you guys are the Law Enforcers of AVEN... We voted you all to lay down th Law so-to-speak if need be...

 

But I only have one nit-pick with your statement...

 

Some people don't have respect of those put in charge for reasons ranging from just 'cause to just being brats... Not everyone respects authority... Somtimes you gotta do what you have to to make them wake up. And saddly, that includes drastic measures if they turn violent... That is what I advise as a last resort if need be, It should NEVER be the first option at all. I'm going to bet you feel the same, Yato?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yato   
Yato
Just now, Achromatic Kitty said:

I agree, Yato. You guys deserve respect. I'm being truthful that I don't agree with every Mod... I agree with some, and disagree with others, but I make it an example to live by when I say you deserve respect. You make sacrifices most of us may never know...

 

I also agree you guys are the Law Enforcers of AVEN... We voted you all to lay down th Law so-to-speak if need be...

 

But I only have one nit-pick with your statement...

 

Some people don't have respect of those put in charge for reasons ranging from just 'cause to just being brats... Not everyone respects authority... Somtimes you gotta do what you have to do make them wake up. And saddly, that includes drastic measures if they turn violent... That is what I advise as a last resort if need be, It should NEVER be the first option at all. I'm going to bet you feel the same, Yato?

There is no reasoning on "Cause they are being brats", if it doesn't break ToS, it gets no action. Simple as that. Respecting authority has nothing to do with decisions. Admods understand venting, and frustration with situations, and are not heartless robots. But if people don't know when to quit, and dig themselves a grave. Admods cannot help them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Achromatic Kitty   
Achromatic Kitty
2 minutes ago, Yato said:

There is no reasoning on "Cause they are being brats", if it doesn't break ToS, it gets no action. Simple as that. Respecting authority has nothing to do with decisions. Admods understand venting, and frustration with situations, and are not heartless robots. But if people don't know when to quit, and dig themselves a grave. Admods cannot help them. 

I see... TY for clarifying Yato...

 

That's called what I call "Hitting up the Death Train." .... And trust by what the stories say, you DON'T want to take a ride on that train, mis amigos...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skycaptain   
Skycaptain

The aim of this clause is to deter staff members from saying "if you don't do this, I'll resign", during discussions. It's just there so staff know what is acceptable, to maintain good order during debates. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Çoñé   
Snao Çoñé

Staff can and do vocally disagree with what the majority are in favour of, and I've seen that in the threads that I've declassed from years ago as well as admods today. If any admods have additional concerns about decisions that went in the other direction from what they felt was right, there are opportunities to bring this up. From what I've seen, respectful and open discussion of disagreements is encouraged.

 

So it's not a "suck it up buttercup" type rule that aims to curb dissenting voices. It's about professionalism and team morale, which both require an environment open enough to welcome other perspectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jayce   
Jayce
2 hours ago, Achromatic Kitty said:

I disagree that that they could step down without this having to happen.

 

They obliviously have some issues that need to be be worked out, and going to extremes is not what you Mods want I'm guessing?

 

Look, I think the best course of action is to wait and see if they are ACTUALLY serious about their threats or not... See if they follow through with resigning. If they don't, then it proves they were bluffing the entire time, and just wanted a reaction.

 

Am i making sense? I hope I am...

Point is that threaths to resign Regardless of circumstance i.e issues needing to be worked on is not professional despite them being serious or just joking. The code of conduct is very clear that professionalism is important when representing AVEN.It has always been this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Lia   
.Lia
4 hours ago, Skycaptain said:

The aim of this clause is to deter staff members from saying "if you don't do this, I'll resign", during discussions. It's just there so staff know what is acceptable, to maintain good order during debates. 

To add: There's nothing saying that after the decision is made, an Admod can't say, "I really, really can't agree with this and while I understand a vote has happened and a decision is made, I feel I must step down to take time to either come to terms with it in my own way, and possibly run again, or to continue on in my AVEN life as best I can under this new rule/procedure/policy/whathaveyou."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68   
Telecaster68

Why not let them resign, rather than bending over backwards to keep a passive aggressive manipulative self aggrandising narcissist on the team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb   
daveb

They are free to resign. They are not free to threaten to resign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68   
Telecaster68

Ignore the threats then, as you would a stroppy toddler?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Achromatic Kitty   
Achromatic Kitty
2 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

Why not let them resign, rather than bending over backwards to keep a passive aggressive manipulative self aggrandising narcissist on the team?

 

1 hour ago, Telecaster68 said:

Ignore the threats then, as you would a stroppy toddler?

 

Well said, Telecaster68.... I agree with your statements. Nothing more to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skycaptain   
Skycaptain

Precisely, but with that clause being there, should staff ever behave in such a fashion, there's a clear point on code of conduct which is breached, this makes any subsequent disciplinary action simpler 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68   
Telecaster68

Why discipline them and create yet more AVEN martyrs though? It just feeds the drama. 

 

Resign or do not resign, there is no 'threaten'... to adapt Yoda. 

 

If everyone just shrugged and said 'okay then', there'd be no reward for childish flouncing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now