Apology from Richard Dawkins (Yes Really).

[kiki5711]

That took cohones, and apology accepted, of course.
But as I posted over there, Richard was IMHO only guilty of trusting his friend.
When Josh apologises for his gross mishandling of the announcement, his disregard for other people (staff and members) and his over-reaction to the initial protests, then we can apologise for calling him a twat, and THAT will be the end of it.

Apologise, explain, detail what lessons were learned, and how things will change in future as a result. Doesn't require that he throw himself to the lions or anything like that. But as long as people cannot have confidence in "the system" over there - and that means the people holding the reins of power - then the site is never likely to recover to anything near what it was.

I have a total bad image of Josh and "asskisser" is the most kindest word I could express.

[Mysturji]

That took cohones, and apology accepted, of course.
But as I posted over there, Richard was IMHO only guilty of trusting his friend.
When Josh apologises for his gross mishandling of the announcement, his disregard for other people (staff and members) and his over-reaction to the initial protests, then we can apologise for calling him a twat, and THAT will be the end of it.

Apologise, explain, detail what lessons were learned, and how things will change in future as a result. Doesn't require that he throw himself to the lions or anything like that. But as long as people cannot have confidence in "the system" over there - and that means the people holding the reins of power - then the site is never likely to recover to anything near what it was.

Picky, picky, picky.

[AshtonBlack]

My current theory is that this is all business/money related, rather than anything else.

Of course it is. Any thought to the contrary is naive.

They are doing what they think will better increase the financial position of the Foundation. And, why not? That's what they're there for. They are not there to set up a forum for us. The forum is a tool.

Exactly.

[anthonzi]

I don't have his original bio. This is from what Richard posted on his front page. And if you think Todd was going to leave his job to work for Richard for free, hmmmmmmmm I don't think so!!

Todd Stiefel Joins RDFRS as Trustee
by Richard Dawkins

Todd Stiefel Joins RDFRS as Trustee
by Richard Dawkins
http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5079

Posted: Friday, February 12, 2010

Oh I see. This may have contributed significantly to the drastic shift in policy under such a short period. He is a very recent addition indeed. Just speculation, but Stiefel's initial reaction to the RD.net Forum might have been something like "OMG MY EYES. CORPORATE FAUX-PAS!." And then proceed to pressure Dawkins to "clean it up" as soon as possible?

[Pappa]

I've personally been guilty of critisising Josh's capabilities on a couple of occasions... I've referred to him as incompetent and a few other things. My reason for this was based on his apparent inability to fix issues with the forum that I think I could quite easily fix myself in his shoes... though I've obviously made a lot of assumptions about him and his job to form that conclusion, assumptions that may be wrong. RD obviously hold's Josh in high regard professionally, and my gut feeling is that he's hardly likely to be wowed by a bit of script-kiddy skillz. Aside from mere speculation, does anyone actually know anything about Josh's qualifications or skills?

[kiki5711]

I've personally been guilty of critisising Josh's capabilities on a couple of occasions... I've referred to him as incompetent and a few other things. My reason for this was based on his apparent inability to fix issues with the forum that I think I could quite easily fix myself in his shoes... though I've obviously made a lot of assumptions about him and his job to form that conclusion, assumptions that may be wrong. RD obviously hold's Josh in high regard professionally, and my gut feeling is that he's hardly likely to be wowed by a bit of script-kiddy skillz. Aside from mere speculation, does anyone actually know anything about Josh's qualifications or skills?

All I know is that there will be a statue made of him and placed in a museum for science paid for by Richard's foundation.

[anthonzi]

All I know is that there will be a statue made of him and placed in a museum for science paid for by Richard's foundation.

Haha. Hopefully the old man grows out of his delusion before then.

[jd]

That took cohones, and apology accepted, of course.
But as I posted over there, Richard was IMHO only guilty of trusting his friend.
When Josh apologises for his gross mishandling of the announcement, his disregard for other people (staff and members) and his over-reaction to the initial protests, then we can apologise for calling him a twat, and THAT will be the end of it.

Apologise, explain, detail what lessons were learned, and how things will change in future as a result. Doesn't require that he throw himself to the lions or anything like that. But as long as people cannot have confidence in "the system" over there - and that means the people holding the reins of power - then the site is never likely to recover to anything near what it was.

Even if Dawkins (privately) accepts that Timonen screwed up royally, I very much doubt we'll hear anything about it - and I would be disappointed in him, in a sense, if we did. Dawkins knows that the buck ultimately stops with him and, even if he was not personally responsible, it would be much better for him to apologise to members, take the hit and then give Timonen a private bollocking.

Good bosses do that kind of thing.

[lordpasternack]

That took cohones, and apology accepted, of course.
But as I posted over there, Richard was IMHO only guilty of trusting his friend.
When Josh apologises for his gross mishandling of the announcement, his disregard for other people (staff and members) and his over-reaction to the initial protests, then we can apologise for calling him a twat, and THAT will be the end of it.

Apologise, explain, detail what lessons were learned, and how things will change in future as a result. Doesn't require that he throw himself to the lions or anything like that. But as long as people cannot have confidence in "the system" over there - and that means the people holding the reins of power - then the site is never likely to recover to anything near what it was.

Even if Dawkins (privately) accepts that Timonen screwed up royally, I very much doubt we'll hear anything about it - and I would be disappointed in him, in a sense, if we did. Dawkins knows that the buck ultimately stops with him and, even if he was not personally responsible, it would be much better for him to apologise to members, take the hit and then give Timonen a private bollocking.

Good bosses do that kind of thing.

I really don't see the sense in that though. It's like scapegoating in a way. Perhaps it just works in a social sense, for all I know or appreciate - but that shit ain't fucking rational. And it's also hypocritical to say to the masses that you take full responsibility, and then make it clear to the troublemaker in private that that will definitely not be the case.

What's wrong with just saying: "The matter is in my hands, and I'm doing my utmost to resolve it"? That covers enough bases, and reassures that something's being done, without being too explicit and risking bringing out the lynch mob in people.

[klr]

I think the problem is that we just don't trust RD enough to do the right thing behind the scenes. This was a disaster waiting to happen, and had been predicted to some extent. Why? Because there was enough "form" available on the personalities and dynamics involved to suggest before that things were as dysfunctional as they've ever been in the past.

The only possible "coded message" I could get out of RD's apology was that he was even more effusive than usual about JT. Something in me thinks that this might be to try and hide/compensate for the fact that some harsh words were said behind the scenes this time.

[Blondie]

Aside from mere speculation, does anyone actually know anything about Josh's qualifications or skills?

I know he's very familiar and skilled with the Blackberry UI. It's amazing.

[jd]

...it's also hypocritical to say to the masses that you take full responsibility, and then make it clear to the troublemaker in private that that will definitely not be the case.

I think we're talking across one another. Taking public responsibility and then talking privately to the person specifically at fault is not hypocrisy, it's protecting your employee but addressing the problem - pretty much what your next sentence says:

What's wrong with just saying: "The matter is in my hands, and I'm doing my utmost to resolve it"? That covers enough bases, and reassures that something's being done, without being too explicit and risking bringing out the lynch mob in people.

Dawkins knows that a screw-up was made, and he (as the boss) is ultimately responsible for that, even if it was simply by not sufficiently supervising/monitoring/controlling an employee. He has decided that Josh Timonen is going to continue working for him, so it makes sense to express support for him, otherwise Timonen would probably be undermined to the point that his position could become untenable. After his behaviour to the RDF Mods and members, I wouldn't much care about this, but Dawkins obviously values Timonen enough to want him to be able to continue.

[lordpasternack]

The only possible "coded message" I could get out of RD's apology was that he was even more effusive than usual about JT. Something in me thinks that this might be to try and hide/compensate for the fact that some harsh words were said behind the scenes this time.

Or maybe he's as green as ever when it comes to taking some role as a 'manager' and understanding certain social dynamics. This isn't the first time that something flared up on RD.net due to some kind of sheer lack of communication between concerned parties, combined with Richard's benign neglect and general ignorance of the place, leading someone to muse that they could be immune to any accountability...

Sometimes I really wish to fuck that Richard had felt just a touch less inspired himself, and left it to a peer of his with a better aptitude for dealing with internet community social dynamics to be the one to start a site such as RD.net. Someone who'd be wise enough, or could delegate to someone who definitely was wise enough, to step in and nip problems in the bud, and get things resolved before they blew out of proportion.

I think he should hire Pappa.

[FedUpWithFaith]

You really hit the mark with that post LordP.

[lordpasternack]

Taking public responsibility and then talking privately to the person specifically at fault is not hypocrisy...

I think it is. Stylistic hypocrisy. Imagine if a worker said to the employer: "But sir, you already accepted full responsibility for this fuck up. Leave me out of it."