A Message From MEG

[Morgan D.]

--- In HP4GU-FAQ at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" <abigailnus at y...> 
wrote:
>  
> You know,
> when people want to volunteer, they usually say something
> about how they want to give something back to the community.

Oh yeah. And we usually ask the community what the community wants, 
what the community needs, how the community feels, so we can serve 
the community best. Right?


> They don't say they want to take part in a power struggle, still
> less a strained dialogue between people who used to be
> friends. That isn't our job and we don't want any part of it.

Power struggle certainly isn't my job or my goal here. Unfortunately, 
I'm not very talented in ignoring a huge white elephant standing in 
the middle of my living room.


> Unfortunately, experience has shown us that dissatisfied
> volunteers can raise issues faster than MEG can deal with them.

Well, don't you think this *might* be significant?


> We don't blame anyone for being unhappy with the site. We've
> long realized that HPfGU can't be all things to all HP fans. 

No, it can't. It would be nice if HPfGU at least could live up to its 
name: Harry Potter for Grown-Ups. As in, *mature* people. 


> It's obvious that there wouldn't be a MEG without HPfGU. We may
> need to point out that there isn't an HPfGU without MEG. It's a
> package deal.

Yes. But nothing is forever, is it? The current constitution of MEG 
isn't permanent. MEG has changed radically since I joined HPfGU; it 
wasn't the first change, I'm sure it won't be the last. And I'm sure 
that even if MEG were to decide to delete the entire community 
tomorrow, there will be those who will roll up their sleeves and 
rebuild it, from scratch if necessary. 

The conception of the HPfGU community is sound, I believe. The 
execution is what, in my opinion, has been flawed. Only recently I've 
learned about the so-called Modgate, but the decadence in the 
administration was noticeable to me all the same.


> MEG's priority is the 11,000 members of HPfGU. Like you, they
> accepted MEG as the leadership of HPfGU when they joined the
> site, and it is for their benefit that MEG and FAQ exist.

When I joined, I accepted the concept of the HPfGU, the philosophy of 
the community, the structure and norms as described by the files sent 
to me right after my subscription. I accepted a leadership that 
claimed to be committed to the task of living up to what had been 
stated in those files.

I did not pledge allegiance to MEG when I joined HPfGU. Even if I 
had, the MEG group then was not the current MEG. 


> If anyone here
> no longer accepts MEG's authority as legitimate, we
> invite you to withdraw your support by the same means that you
> offered it, by unsubbing from our sites.

I accept MEG's authority as the authority de facto. Obviously, MEG is 
in command. MEG commands the Main List and sister lists, and it 
obviously commands FAQ as well.

But I do believe I am entitled to my opinions, aren't I? Aren't I 
entitled to think MEG has been doing a lousy job? Aren't I entitled 
to hope things will get better? Aren't I entitled to believe HPfGU 
will see better days when some of the current MEGs are replaced by 
more competent and less narrow-minded members?

Or will MEG only accept working with people that believe everything 
MEG does is good and fair and right?


Morgan D.