I just checked out the chat and....yeah no. Tiffany is the purity police for sure. How did she get nominated to be elected, or even employed at AO3 in the first place if she’s pro-censorship? That’s the antithesis of AO3. Her responses are full of “the public” perception and outsider’s opinions and “legal issues that need to be addressed” (doesn’t name one) and vague “changes” that need to be made to TOS and what can be posted.
I’m most concerned about her statement “people think we host child porn content and such things. This issue is actually closely related to the incident when our service is banned in my home country.”
This person clearly has an agenda they’re itching to inflict on us all.
Her interview responses for anyone who doesn’t want to click on the link above:
Our first question today is: Can you say something nice about each of your fellow candidates?
Everyone has worked longer here at OTW compared to me. So the time and effort you have put in really helped and inspired me. it would not be possible without all of you.
Thank you both for your kind words. Next up we have questions directed at our candidates individually.
For Tiffany G.: If elected as a board member, what do you most look forward to being able to do that you haven’t been able to do in other positions at the OTW? What do you anticipate will be the biggest challenge?
I am very interested in the work of PAC and Legal since the very beginning. I have not had a chance to experience it so look forward to learning more about them. I believe a lot of external people have issues with our ToS and policies so working with those will be the biggest challenge. I have had discussions with respective volunteers and it seems like we have limited resources and legal issues that need to be addressed, and delivered to the public.
Thank you both for sharing about your struggles within the org. Next we have questions for candidates specifically again!
For Tiffany G: You’ve mentioned in the Q&As and in these chats that you’d be interested in changes to the TOS and our policies — can you expand more on what changes you think might be interesting?
I think making the documentation more visible would help, and potentially reaching out to qualified volunteers directly. There’s a pretty thorough position description for the Diversity Consultant Research Officer on our internal tools, but if you don’t know where to find it, it’s not going to help you decide if that’s a position you can fill. So I think just talking about it more would also help people realize that hey, maybe that’s something they could do.
Well, I think a lot of external people are very concerned about the fact that some works contain child pornography, pedophilic content, and other illegal content. If possible (this is not entirely possible after I chatted with people from PAC though), I am interested in providing extra help to the PAC team and Legal team to update the ToS and policies on those.
Thank you both! We have questions specific to our candidates again here:
And a follow up for Tiffany G.: If you were to work with Legal and PAC to update the Archive’s ToS on content like pedophilia, would you want to disallow those types of works, or are you referring to another type of change or clarification?
OK this is a follow-up to the last question – people think we host child porn content and such things. This issue is actually closely related to the incident when our service is banned in my home country. It might also be helpful to clarify that to the public. I am not an expert but look forward to discussing it more with respective committees.
Thank you both! Just to clarify Tiffany, the Archive of Our Own does not host any works that contain materials that are illegal in the United States, such as child pornography. Which leads us to the next two follow-up questions for Tiffany G. : a) You mention wanting to update the TOS to address concerns about content posted to the site. How does that fit into AO3 general principle of “maximum inclusiveness of content”? Which content and why?
b) you proposing that the Terms of Service be updated to restrict additional content that is currently allowed on the Archive
a) I support 100% “maximum inclusiveness of content”, yet there is always a boundary to everything. Since OTW is already an influential org, we need to protect our image and hold a better image to the public. I want the public to think of us as an inclusive and socially responsible community. So in general, we have to do something to change. Things like making the rating system more specific and obvious to users will be what I want to do.
b) Not really restricting the content being posted. I hope it is like more warnings and ratings for posting work so people know what to expect. And all of these are not surprising to people who do not wish to see this.
Thank you for your answers! We do have two more related follow ups for Tiffany G. on the topic of content on AO3:
a) please does your definition of content that should be disallowed include all written content depicting sexual content of minors?
b) please clarify how you propose we treat the content we currently have in the archive that should be banned with those proposed TOS changes
a) That is not what I proposed actually. I would want to be more specific in the rating system and clarifications so people know what to expect.
b) If there are changes, it is going to be some slower work I suspect. Will work with PAC to figure out if changes are necessary.
2087
kaledo-art
blakekathryn
dededos
pixelskylines
annaxmalina
kianamaiart
snowghoul
vaporwave
izzy806
discoholicmusic
