Daniel Greenwolf conversation, March 10

 Owl: *waves* making sure you saw this:
(Link to Google doc of chat log)

 Daniel Greenwolf (DG): I'm reading it over. It looks like it's from when everything first broke.

Owl: Yes, it starts right afterward and goes for a couple days.

DG: I can't read it over right now, I'm currently at the gym. But I've seen it circulating.

Owl: OK. Just wanted to make sure!

DG: There seems to be a lot of fear in what's going back and forth, from what I can initially see.

Owl: The statements in the line of "Even if the accusations were true..." are disturbing. But Ill let you take the time to read.

 DG: As I'm reading it, it looks like a group desperately trying to hold on to an event that, at the time, didn't believe it could exist without the face of the company.
It also sounds like Michael has been on the wrong side of false accusations, and he sympathized with Jeff because there were certainly some of the tales that seemed suspect (We of course now know there were many that weren't) and that triggered him. And rightfully so. But at the end of it all, they were trying to save Wicked Faire... at least that is what it seems to me.

 I've been on the back end of an event as your [sp] days away and everything seems to come crashing down around you. Nuance does matter.

 That doesn't seem out of line, does it?

Owl: I'm just sharing the information. I, personally, aim to never say anything privately that I would regret publicly.

DG: Aiming means you can miss. And it's okay to miss when you think you're amongst friends and you're stressed.
I'm damned certain I've said things to people, even when I'm right, that I've regretted. Hell, I've even apologized for it to them.
I'm pretty sure my brother and I almost killed each other in front of our staff a couple years ago.

 Owl: IMHO, you're good people. I wanted to make sure you saw this because I don't think it shows the current SPS staff as trustworthy people. But, you can make your own choices, obviously.

DG: We were wrong. (As I'm still here and I haven't been convicted, we both lived. :-) ) This stuff is hard. It's scary. You have thousands of people depending on you to make decisions that will effect them personally and professionally. Whether it's the vendor who depends on these events to make a living, or maybe just a patron that spent good money to be there that weekend.
As a note, the only person you're talking about is Michael. Amy shows Focus and is absolutely not every on Jeff's side of things.

Owl: Michael and Tammy.

DG: And even Michael and Tammy are more about innocent until proven guilty, and trying to save the event.
Trustworthiness means that they're lying. I don't see any lies there, unless you see something I don't.

Owl: They've said one thing in the chat and another publicly.

DG: What was the thing they said in the chat and then said publicly?

Owl: They support Jeff and want him to return (chat) vs. They believe the victims and don't want Jeff back (public)

DG: Earlier on they supported Jeff, and there were a lot of other people who did too.

Owl: Yes, but they are under a microscope.

DG: That seems mildly unfair. They're trying to make it right, and they're doing their best  especially now. Developing a group of people who were not a part of JM previously, and being as transparent as possible.
Even now, they're eight weeks away from an event where the money is gone. Any money that JM collected doesn't exist. That's 900 patrons and over 100 vendors. Steampunk doesn't go off, those folks are screwed. What would you do?

Owl: I have no answer for the vendors, but in regards to SPS, I'm sorry, but I don't see it that way. I see people who have dodged public questions, don't officially own the events yet, and who cannot fathom the hurt of the community.

DG: SPS could refund the 200 People who bought tickets after this all went down. But those 1000 people... just screwed.
I don't think you understand how truly hurt the community is, especially from a financial standpoint. A lot of these people make their living doing these events. And they have to book 6 months and a year out. Which is why JM was able to do what he's done for so long. You have to think about those folks. It's unfair otherwise.

Owl: So hand over the event to other people.

DG: They are answering questions, a lot of them. Even the ones that don't deserve answering because they've already answered them before. I followed this very closely. It's why I'm on the board, to make to make sure Jeff Mach makes no money off of it and has nothing to do with it physically.

Owl: Then why did they dodge so many of the questions?

DG: No one else will take it. This is a non-profit board. They're not going to make any money off of this. And Tammy's sunk a lot of her money to save Wicked because she believes in the community.

DG: They didn't, seriously. Ask them anything and they will answer it, or point you to where they've already answered it.

Owl: Look at the Q&A.

DG: I did. Very much so
What questions do you think they didn't answer?

Owl: Why was there a toddler at Wicked?

DG: Are you a parent?

Owl: No.
But they didn't answer.
They could have said that she was there as a child of staff and was watched at all times and in bed before dark.

DG: You know, as well as anyone else, that the child was Michael and Amy's. There is nothing about Wicked, particularly the lobby, that is unsafe for a toddler.

Owl: Yes but they didn't answer.

DG: It's also because the person asking the question to the answer and they were trying to trap them. And you have to admit, that's really a dick move when it's your kid.
To be honest, they did better than I would've. If someone brought up my kids, I would have salted the goddamn Earth.

Owl: Oh come on. I've seen toddlers and babies there before.
They should have answered honestly.

DG: Our families should be off limits to this. It's cruel. And, as you said, you've seen Toddlers and babies there before, so the question is moot.
It was meant just to make them look bad, and that's messed up.

Owl: Why not answer though?
Also responses like "A) Any questions about how previous ownership handled staff structure needs to be directed to them." are b.s.

DG: Because they're being overprotective. They don't want their child being thrown into this.

Owl: How about "There are occasionally exceptions for vendors and staff."

DG: No, I don't think that's BS at all. For instance the person who posted this conversation was the one on the consent board and she hasn't answered any of those questions.
Yes there are occasionally exceptions, because again, child care is expensive and some folks have no choice. And almost every event I've ever worked  that isn't a kink event understands that.
And Wicked Faire, is not a kink event.

Owl: 1) There is no confirmation on who posted the conversation.
2) Nothing SPS has done is any different than what they seemed to plan to do in that early convo.
I'm just sharing the information. But you are an adult and can believe whatever you like.

DG: In fact, it was one of the big gripes people had was that the Kink track was being phased out. Relegated to two rooms.
Come on. You're smart. You know who posted that conversation.

Owl: Technically? I posted it. It's my blog.

DG: And they have done things very differently, and you're smart and you know that too. The big thing was among it very clear that Jeff Mach is not welcome at any event whatsoever. And will never be welcome. And you'll never make a dime off any SPS event. And I will see to that otherwise I will scream it from the mountain tops.

You posted it, and you also know where you got it from. Because that was a private conversation amongst the staff.
Look, don't talk to me like I'm dumb. You are correct, we are adults. And we live in a world of nuance . We live in a world where nothing is easy, nothing is black and white. These guys took for-profit events and turned them into non-profit events (purposefully nonprofit I should say). They posted bylaws, consent violation procedures, conversations they've had with others, they've talked to death and they're going to keep talking.

This stuff isn't easy. And you are so intelligent, and you're also determined, and that is damned admirable.
And you have an agenda. And I understand that. I'm not quiet about my agenda. I want to make sure that JM doesn't hurt anymore vendors, performers, or patrons.

And want to make sure that SPS doesn't do it either.
That's why I'm getting involved. You should get invovled.
They need more smart people. They just recently added two new people to the board who didn't have anything to do with JM events from what I know of
Help keep them in line. Help them create something. Help them make it right and keep this community strong.

Owl: I don't work with people I can't trust. If Gil or Dave Ghoul ever runs a convention, I'm 100% behind them.

DG: That's the problem. It's easy to take a stance when you don't have to do anything. It's harder to work on something from the inside. It's so much harder to create than do destroy. If you actually don't trust them, get in the room and prove yourself right.

Owl: "If there's a fire to douse, you can't put it out from inside the house." (Note: apologies to Lin-Manuel Miranda for the misquote.)

DG: And then scream it to the mountain tops. That's what I'm doing. I didn't know Tammy before this all started. I didn't know most of these people. I worked for Mike Whitehouse several times and he came to my karaoke show and we talked a bit.

He is genuinely good people. And I couldn't vouch for anyone else, except Amy, until I saw the conversations myself and got involved.
You keep the fire from starting. That's what you do inside the house.
I know it's scary. And what you're doing is easier. I get that. And you should hold people accountable. But you have to be honest about your intentions. If you want to burn them down and that is your goal, say so.

Owl: I want the community to not continue to be hurt by con-mans and predators.

DG: I agree. I'll continue this conversation in a minute. I have to go take a mouse out of my house.
Lol. Seriously. That's not a euphemism.

Poor guy. He was stuck in the ceiling of our basement

But again, you and I have the same goal.
But the way, I'll be posting this conversation in its entirety, unedited (With the exception of formatting. I'll put it in word doc form)
Transparency until it's uncomfortable.

Right?

Owl: Yes you can post.
I expected it.

DG: I figured. You're awesome like that. :-)
And that's not just Flattery. You've taken a monumental task upon yourself.

Owl: I'm a librarian; organizing information is what I do.

DG: Maybe, but you are also taking on a crusade, of sorts. You're not just an information aggregate. Some of the statements you've made make it clear, at least to me. And to many other people. Which is why people are giving you information. Because they believe what you believe and they want what you want, at least as far as I can tell.
Unfortunately, there will always be those that just want to see something burn. And they're going to try to get to you too. That's gotta suck a bit.