Being linked to in the last metafandom post, I assume you are in part responding to that, and if so, I want to clarify something. You identify the line in the mission statement about female identity as being the line that is seen as problematic by some. I think the line does exclude (in this case, not people who aren't female, but those fen who don't share that history), but I don't think this exclusion is a problem. Every group needs a focus, and that seems to be theirs. I am uncomfortable by their trying to represent all of fandom and saying that they are inclusive, because obviously some of us don't share their history, identity or vision.
The criticisms of the OTW most often appear to rest on what it appears to be, to think, to want--and not on what it is doing. (Not much yet. Give it a few months.) This is, I think, a mistake...
People are going to respond to what they see, and so far, we mainly have words to go by. We also have the backgrounds of the people on the board. I don't think its a mistake to start forming opinions based on this. That's what we do when faced with something new, like voting for a new president- what do the candidates say? what have they done in the past? I think it is a mistake not to keep an open mind and be willing to change one's opinion though.
no subject
The criticisms of the OTW most often appear to rest on what it appears to be, to think, to want--and not on what it is doing. (Not much yet. Give it a few months.) This is, I think, a mistake...
People are going to respond to what they see, and so far, we mainly have words to go by. We also have the backgrounds of the people on the board. I don't think its a mistake to start forming opinions based on this. That's what we do when faced with something new, like voting for a new president- what do the candidates say? what have they done in the past? I think it is a mistake not to keep an open mind and be willing to change one's opinion though.