I'm Stepping Down from the BoG, Effective Today.

[Renomitsu 930]

No clickbait title here. I am stepping down from the Board of Governors (BoG) effective today, something I've discussed at length with few and briefly or more tangentially with others.

 

I made a post last offseason about some surface-level insight I'd had after a season or two as part of the board, noting that I'm (even now) new relative to other members. As a result, a decision to step down does not come lightly; I understand I was incredibly fortunate to have even been considered for a position in the first place, and some had questions about how long I'd actually be on the site in the first place after taking Seasons 44-64 off. Though I've wavered from this decision throughout the season and disclosed to some that I was considering it, the finality of the decision has become gradually more concrete as the weeks have gone by.

 

My final choice to step down is multifactorial, though is solidified most by events from the last few weeks. Many of them are from local circumstances, while others are site-specific.

 

The first is the obvious: 2019-nCoV. As I've expressed publicly and privately across multiple sim leagues and as a trainee entering the healthcare work force in the next couple of years, this is a cause for significant uncertainty in my future. At present, it seems as though many of the events that need to happen for trainees in my position are being delayed, and we're unfortunately going to be burned from both ends of the wick: we're presently not allowed to participate in clinical rotations, and while my fourth-year medical student colleagues prepare to enter their residency -- possibly early to supplement the current crisis -- we may be asked to graduate on the original schedule. This means we lose valuable time on service as students. While this is not an immediate problem for me, I think it best to hand off any leadership role I have should things suddenly change. The appropriate time is now, in a comfortable and controlled environment, rather than abruptly and suddenly when we're asked to go on service with lifted hour limits (currently capped at 80/wk), which we have been made aware is a real possibility and was originally our schedule mid last week when expecting massively increased hospital volume.

 

Unfortunately, my next few reasons are more amorphous, and I've voiced them to only a few others. There were severally eventually-uneventful decisions I disagreed with on principle -- one of which was my position on the board being heralded by the unbanning of a particular member -- to the debacle a season or two ago with one of our affiliates that left a sour taste in my mouth. But as I'd highlighted in my previous post, I haven't agreed with, nor should I agree with, every decision from a collective intelligence. It's the same deal with awards: I see some selections one way, while the majority see them differently. But these were not major contributors to my decision to leave. On some important issues I found myself disengaged or disenfranchised with the issue at hand, while in others I felt impassioned but unheard: these two issues combined were a minority of cases, but my frustration with them were concerning enough to me that at this stage, the site would be better served if I did not have a hand in them.

 

That's the crux of it, really. I hope that vacating my position will motivate and open up the way for a different member who is, idealistic, intelligent, and passionate about improving this site to join the Board. I don't plan on going away any time soon, and I'll still continue to earn at my current rate as I have for the last year. I'll still be on for HotS and LoL LFG and that D&D campaign is still definitely in the works - don't you guys worry.

My parting from the Board of Governors is one hopefully met amicably by my fellow board members and administrators. I've made no bad blood with anyone in the group to my knowledge, and I pray they all feel the same way.

Thanks for humoring me by taking the time to read this.

 

@Beketov

[Beaviss 4,949]

[.sniffuM 1,741]

When you bring on a new voice or two to a group of people that have been having these same discussions for a long time, that new voice will get drowned out because everyone else is already firm in their stance. There's no point in bringing in a few new people to the BOG if they're just going to be a small dissenting opinion against the wave that has already resulted in a maintained status quo. We need rotating BOG.

[Doomsday 4,053]

You can't escape being a fake blue that easily!

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

40 minutes ago, .sniffuM said:

When you bring on a new voice or two to a group of people that have been having these same discussions for a long time, that new voice will get drowned out because everyone else is already firm in their stance. There's no point in bringing in a few new people to the BOG if they're just going to be a small dissenting opinion against the wave that has already resulted in a maintained status quo. We need rotating BOG.

 

You're speaking as if the long term BOG members are a solid voting block.

 

And I'll argue that long-term members bring stability and the understanding of why things are the way they are now and why they were originally changed. Not saying the decision is always correct, but at least the reasoning behind it.

 

Also:

 

@DollarAndADream

@flyersfan1493
@sterling
@Banackock

@diamond_ace

@Will

@Devise

@Victor

@tfong

@Josh

@Sonnet

@Renomitsu

@Matt_O

@Advantage

 

Sterling is Sterling, Will is portal, and ADV stepped down. That leaves Dollar, me, Bana, D_A, Devise, Victor, and tfong as the "old" members, and we most definitely do not always agree or feel the league should be run in a certain way.

 

Leaving Josh, Sonnet, Reno, and Matt_O as "new" voices.

 

Not like BoG has actual final authority on much anyway.

[Victor 10,580]

16 hours ago, flyersfan1453 said:

Not like BoG has actual final authority on much anyway.

This is also very important to note - it's an advisory rather than decision making board.

[Devise 4,475]

17 hours ago, .sniffuM said:

When you bring on a new voice or two to a group of people that have been having these same discussions for a long time, that new voice will get drowned out because everyone else is already firm in their stance. There's no point in bringing in a few new people to the BOG if they're just going to be a small dissenting opinion against the wave that has already resulted in a maintained status quo. We need rotating BOG.

 

That would be an accurate take and all if like...it was the case. But the BoG isn't just a wave of one opinion with one small dissenting one on a lot of things. Awards in particular, as what people favor and how people look at things absolutely has changed as the league itself has changed era's. But yeah @flyersfan1453 details pretty well that it is a good mix of newer and older members even still. 

 

I will point out though, I don't really get how we've "maintained the status quo." A significant member was unbanned, status quo of those who he burned would of absolutely been to leave him banned. We've added a new Commish. Again, status quo would of indicated otherwise. We just announced a plethora of differing TPE changes, do you think that was easy? Forget status quo, the conversations around what to cap, what to allow was one of the most dissenting conversations in BoG history. Several people had their minds changed and altered throughout, and the principal idea of what was pitched and what ended up coming to the table absolutely altered. 

 

I think the thing a lot of people forget is that, A, on top of the BoG being an advisory role the importance of having older members is so that people still have a voice or two in there that can help not just "stop changes that aren't needed" but also and this is key, help changes that are needed get made in a way that helps protect the league stability. Newer members to the BoG and even Commish team can at times get wild eyed with ideas of just shaking everything up all the time. If Beaviss had his way there'd be like 20 teams in the league probably right now with no thought given to the current ever evolving status quo. Good ideas sometimes also take good implementation strategies to be effective. Not just "well it's a good idea in principle so let's just throw it on and see what sticks." 

 

Again though, I think it's odd to be overtly critical of the BoG in a time when several of the suggestions members have been making, members not in the BoG, newer members posting these things in Suggestions threads, have found ways to be implemented in one way or another. If that doesn't show a significant signal that A, we have some newer faces in the BoG but also B, we are still listening to the league at whole when factoring in the decisions we would advise for and against I don't know what does. 

Edited March 21, 2020 by Devise

[Enorama 1,981]

I understand both sides of this. Kudos to Reno for doing what he feels is right and kudos to the BoG for actually making a concerted effort to bring in new voices to the BoG.

 

7 minutes ago, Devise said:

Again though, I think it's odd to be overtly critical of the BoG

 

This I disagree with though, I think everyone should always be critical of the BoG. It may not be fun for the governers themselves, but when you have any modicum of power (I know commissioners have final say, but BoG realistically 'makes' a lot of decisions), you should be prepared to be criticized endlessly. It makes for a healthier relationship when you're ready to hear and actually listen to all dissenting opinions.

[Devise 4,475]

Just now, Enorama said:

I understand both sides of this. Kudos to Reno for doing what he feels is right and kudos to the BoG for actually making a concerted effort to bring in new voices to the BoG.

 

 

This I disagree with though, I think everyone should always be critical of the BoG. It may not be fun for the governers themselves, but when you have any modicum of power (I know commissioners have final say, but BoG realistically 'makes' a lot of decisions), you should be prepared to be criticized endlessly. It makes for a healthier relationship when you're ready to hear and actually listen to all dissenting opinions.

 

 Obviously I'm not remotely implying people don't have a right to be critical of the BoG as a whole. But if the narrative is going to be "the BoG doesn't listen" while the league is enacting things people are advocating for outside of the BoG then perhaps we need to reign in our criticism to a realistic and not hyperbolic level? It's not an issue of fun or not fun. It's not an issue of whether I like it or not. It's about justification. And you can tell entirely from your response, do you not think we listen to dissenting opinions?

 

Looking at Muffins/Damiens specific example of criticism, like you, his implication was heavy that the BoG as a whole doesn't listen to dissenting opinions and completely enacts some "status quo." That isn't criticism of a dissenting opinion. That is a naked assumption of an entire group of people with no merit. I'll be happy to listen to like...you know, reasoned arguments for what it is people specifically think the BoG is and isn't doing wrong. But again, the suggestions and complaints area is for that, and as has been proven, not speculated, it is being listened to. 

 

I'd also go ahead and make even further argument proving how we listen to dissenting opinion. I'm a full time lurker most of the time on this site. Yet everytime I come upon a thread like this, or a comment like Damiens, I try to do my due diligence to respond and keep the dialogue going. It seems to me like as an advocate of the BoG I'm doing the very thing I'm being told I'm not doing.  

 

[.sniffuM 1,741]

Just to clear things up, my point wasn't that the old guard in the BOG crushes new opinions or maintains a status quo. It was more that, by being in there for a long time and having partaken in a lot of the discussions already, they've already taken the time to argue their point and thus would likely be more dug in to their opinion (so their stances become a 'status quo' so to speak). So, when someone new comes in with a fresh take on a subject or at least with the enthusiasm to discuss it, they won't be taken as seriously because a lot of the other people have already been through the ringer on the subject. Idk if that happens in the modern BOG, but I definitely see it as a possibility, and I don't like that. My whole thing is that there should be more rotation, because it should not be a plus to say that 4 out of 11 'significant' members of the BOG are new members when we've been riding this influx wave for well over a year now, and one of those 4 new members has spent half his BOG time inactive. I'd much rather the ratios be flipped, four long-term BOG people and about twice that in rotating spots.

 

I also don't feel nearly as strongly about this as the wording in my last post and this one would suggest. I've been on a winding rollercoaster of pain and medicated for days now.

[Devise 4,475]

9 minutes ago, .sniffuM said:

Just to clear things up, my point wasn't that the old guard in the BOG crushes new opinions or maintains a status quo. It was more that, by being in there for a long time and having partaken in a lot of the discussions already, they've already taken the time to argue their point and thus would likely be more dug in to their opinion (so their stances become a 'status quo' so to speak). So, when someone new comes in with a fresh take on a subject or at least with the enthusiasm to discuss it, they won't be taken as seriously because a lot of the other people have already been through the ringer on the subject. Idk if that happens in the modern BOG, but I definitely see it as a possibility, and I don't like that. My whole thing is that there should be more rotation, because it should not be a plus to say that 4 out of 11 'significant' members of the BOG are new members when we've been riding this influx wave for well over a year now, and one of those 4 new members has spent half his BOG time inactive. I'd much rather the ratios be flipped, four long-term BOG people and about twice that in rotating spots.

 

I also don't feel nearly as strongly about this as the wording in my last post and this one would suggest. I've been on a winding rollercoaster of pain and medicated for days now.

 

I appreciate some more specifics. When I get some time later I'll respond to this later hopefully to bring some clarification to some of your thoughts and concerns on this.

[Enorama 1,981]

14 minutes ago, .sniffuM said:

I also don't feel nearly as strongly about this as the wording in my last post and this one would suggest. I've been on a winding rollercoaster of pain and medicated for days now.

 

Your entire point is discredited because you lack a gall bladder.

[fonziGG 1,065]

19 hours ago, Renomitsu said:

That's the crux of it, really. I hope that vacating my position will motivate and open up the way for a different member who is, idealistic, intelligent, and passionate about improving this site to join the Board.

Haha do you know us?

[Devise 4,475]

21 hours ago, .sniffuM said:

Just to clear things up, my point wasn't that the old guard in the BOG crushes new opinions or maintains a status quo. It was more that, by being in there for a long time and having partaken in a lot of the discussions already, they've already taken the time to argue their point and thus would likely be more dug in to their opinion (so their stances become a 'status quo' so to speak). So, when someone new comes in with a fresh take on a subject or at least with the enthusiasm to discuss it, they won't be taken as seriously because a lot of the other people have already been through the ringer on the subject. Idk if that happens in the modern BOG, but I definitely see it as a possibility, and I don't like that.

 

Alright sorry for the delay on getting back to you here. While I cannot tell you that 100% of the time, there isn't an example of someone coming in with some enthusiasm on an idea that has previously been hashed being met with some push back, I feel in general in the instances when that does happen one of the older tenured BoG members steps in and generally does a good job trying to catch people up to speed, and in some cases has even resulted in said enthusiastic voice being better able to tailor and present their ideas. It isn't always as collaborative as one would like, that is the nature of these type of debates. But in all my seasons inside of the BoG I'd say this modern incarnation has had some of the most collaboration that I can recall. 

 

The other thing I'd like to bring up too, we are often in uncharted waters when it comes to the types of changes we have to make. I've seen way more issues pop up that are first ever for the league, both from an admin and a league structure standpoint. This means that while some of us may have preconceived conceptions about how things ought to be working, we all are still coming at these new problems fresh. That doesn't change the fact that obviously I agree a nice well balanced approach in terms of a good representation of types of league members is also a good thing. Also, on top of there being a lot of newer problems, older problems have resurfaced in different ways. I think outright saying that blankly just because a member has tenure means they don't grasp or understand how the league has evolved over the seasons can be a little misleading. Your basically implying a members stance can't change as the league has. Or they can't be swayed by argument because newer facts present themselves. I guess for me, and obviously I feel I have a better ability to say this given my time with the league, but I feel like on the whole every member I've encountered in the BoG carries themselves with more professionalism than to let that type of stuff come up too often. 

 

21 hours ago, Devise said:

My whole thing is that there should be more rotation, because it should not be a plus to say that 4 out of 11 'significant' members of the BOG are new members when we've been riding this influx wave for well over a year now, and one of those 4 new members has spent half his BOG time inactive. I'd much rather the ratios be flipped, four long-term BOG people and about twice that in rotating spots.

 

Representation in the BoG is a constant resurfacing topic and I imagine will be for some time. I don't disagree with a rotation philosophy, however I don't think a wide spread one would work. A big reason things have stayed more status quo with crops of new members coming in to a rotating core is because a good majority of that rotating core would be in the BoG regardless for practical reasons relating often to league job status. I will say though that I have recently kick started a solution around this consistently resurfacing issue and we'll see what happens. I am myself a big proponent of not only getting newer faces in the group, but also maybe facilitating a switch to a larger group of members to better reflect our now larger league.