I’m one of the organisers mentioned in the post, and for now I would like to say that we are still in the process of clarifying this whole issue, I will react to this post by Roland as soon as I have a clearer picture of what is going on and how we could resolve this.
are you serious? I’ve been talking with you about this since early Dec 2017 and the reason I posted this was exactly because of the lack of clarification and clear stances.
How comes that you are still “in the process”? Also if there is/was any serious process I would expect you to go through it before excluding someone, no?
It’s possible that a fast reaction was needed temporarily but ideally clarity should be faster. Than several months. It’s clear that you both care about community and that’s very important to you.
Although I may very well be guilty of not handling this issue appropriately quickly, it was only less than two weeks ago that Roland has given me new essential information about a conversation between him and another organiser mentioned in the post , I first wanted to check this with said organiser (I did now and it seems that not everything Roland told me is actually true). I can only speak for the organisers of EAZ, but we have never permanently banned or formally excluded him (if that’s what he means by “excluding”), I only temporarily banned him until we had clarified some specific issues (which I will address soon), after which the temporary ban was lifted by EAZ and he was told about one week ago that he could still come to our events if he wanted, although no one we spoke to would be happy to have him at our events. If that’s what he means by having been “excluded ” he is indeed right. The “process” of clarifying was finished by then for what had happened until then. I would prefer to respond to the post and address every issue raised after having spoken to everyone involved and to spatiality, who has offered to talk to us about this. Also I also wouldn’t mind external mediation if offered and deemed necessary.
Roland has given me new essential information about a conversation between him and another organiser mentioned in the post , I first wanted to check this with said organiser (I did now and it seems that not everything Roland told me is actually true).
I gave new information, but it is not essential. It was related to Rationality Zurich and not to EA Zurich.
About what I’m saying not being true, it seems that what Marko told you is not the same as what he told me. But again this is only related to Rationality Zürich, not EA Zürich, so what would that make a difference for you from EA?
I’m one of the organisers mentioned in the post, and for now I would like to say that we are still in the process of clarifying this whole issue, I will react to this post by Roland as soon as I have a clearer picture of what is going on and how we could resolve this.
DW
are you serious? I’ve been talking with you about this since early Dec 2017 and the reason I posted this was exactly because of the lack of clarification and clear stances.
How comes that you are still “in the process”? Also if there is/was any serious process I would expect you to go through it before excluding someone, no?
It’s possible that a fast reaction was needed temporarily but ideally clarity should be faster. Than several months. It’s clear that you both care about community and that’s very important to you.
Although I may very well be guilty of not handling this issue appropriately quickly, it was only less than two weeks ago that Roland has given me new essential information about a conversation between him and another organiser mentioned in the post , I first wanted to check this with said organiser (I did now and it seems that not everything Roland told me is actually true). I can only speak for the organisers of EAZ, but we have never permanently banned or formally excluded him (if that’s what he means by “excluding”), I only temporarily banned him until we had clarified some specific issues (which I will address soon), after which the temporary ban was lifted by EAZ and he was told about one week ago that he could still come to our events if he wanted, although no one we spoke to would be happy to have him at our events. If that’s what he means by having been “excluded ” he is indeed right. The “process” of clarifying was finished by then for what had happened until then. I would prefer to respond to the post and address every issue raised after having spoken to everyone involved and to spatiality, who has offered to talk to us about this. Also I also wouldn’t mind external mediation if offered and deemed necessary.
Offering if you find it necessary.
Read my post, I explicitly mentioned that I was still allowed at EA meetings, just not welcome.
I gave new information, but it is not essential. It was related to Rationality Zurich and not to EA Zurich.
About what I’m saying not being true, it seems that what Marko told you is not the same as what he told me. But again this is only related to Rationality Zürich, not EA Zürich, so what would that make a difference for you from EA?