Reposting the comments I have left in other public spaces, regarding various topics about the OTW:

To azarias, in response to her comment left on an AO3 news post, posted on 24th June 2023:

Hey Azarias,
Speaking entirely on my own as a personal volunteer within the org, and in no way claiming to represent the org or any other volunteer officially, or even unofficially, I'd just like to let you know that the statements from Board and Legal were posted at the same time, by the Board Member.

Also speaking personally, in no way did any of the questions I have asked Board about your case happen because I "got suspicious about [your culpability] and asked for clarification". I have always believed you to be wholly innocent of any wrongdoing, and my questions to the board were always motivated from a sense of wanting justice for the callous and unprofessional way you were treated, as well as a sense of concern about what current volunteers can expect.
We have been told that Board has been advised to not speak further about your case, so I don't know if they will ever let us know if they apologise to you. So I genuinely appreciate the enormous effort you put into providing that information, publicly, here, in comments.

For what it's worth, speaking personally, I appreciated your work in the org while you were a part of it, and I especially appreciated your advocacy against the organisation's systemic racism.

(Source: https://archiveofourown.org/comments/663953545)

To the OTW Communications Committee, left in response to their Dreamwidth post, on 26th June 2023:

Hi Comms,
I am reposting a copy of the comment I had left on 11th June in your Comms Public channel on Slack, as a current volunteer who also uses the dreamwidth account.
I will note that Comms chair replied to my comment with "I'll add this to the other comments we've received".

Hi Comms,
I'm commenting here as a reader of the dreamwidth account you run, since you asked for feedback from subscribers to the account. (https://otw-news.dreamwidth.org/1080331.html?nc=29&style=mine#comments) I've been a subscriber of the OTW account since it was created, and it is my primary source of information regarding the public posts on OTW and AO3. I agree with the other commenters that the RSS feed is unreliable and ephemeral, and that you should not stop posting to the account. I also agree with them that you should be posting the announcements of upcoming Board public meetings to the community - its a suggestion I had made to Comms myself several years ago (in this channel I think, though I will need to search the archives to find a citation to be sure.)

I would also like to provide feedback that the way you have framed your post places a burden on the dreamwidth subscribers to feel responsibility for the OTW volunteer workload. I do not think that asking our user base the question "Is this useful" should be accompanied by "because we're too overworked" as implication. If this committee is short-staffed, it should recruit more volunteers. You could, even, make a post exclusive to dreamwidth, asking for a volunteer who is familiar with the site.

I want to also point out that the metrics you have cited as "there has been little to no engagement here on Dreamwidth" are a logical outcome of the OTW comms policy to discourage engagement on almost every social media platform it has an account on. Like the other subscribers commenting on that post, I click through to the actual site post to read the comments there, because there is a clear culture of not talking in the comments to the dreamwidth post. If you have no way of measuring how many people are clicking through to comment on the site, then your review of engagement seems incomplete. I see that the community has, as of today, 1,210 subscribers. Have you noticed that number dropping down from previous subscribers? Increasing?

Finally, I see that both the community OTW_News, and the two admin accounts OTW_Staff and OTW_webmasters are all free accounts. I would suggest that you make at least one account a paid one, so that you can do periodic public searches of dreamwidth and its comments, to proactively listen to what is being said about OTW amongst its user base, and share that feedback, when relevant, with Board and other Chairs. With a paid account, you can subscribe to the individual thread that FFA uses to discuss OTW and AO3. If the org is serious about doing a better job listening to its ex-volunteers, like Azarias, it would, I believe, be part of Communication's remit to monitor one of the few spaces where current and former volunteers feel safe enough to speak up.

And this is a copy of the comment I left in their public slack channel today, the 26th of June:

Hi Comms,
I see from your latest post on Dreamwidth that you chose to ignore the universal feedback you got from subscribers to maintain the community, and decided to stop posting to the comm there.
You cited a metric about how "5% of subscribers" responded.

What percentage of responses were you holding as a benchmark for continuing the community, and why did you not communicate that to the users before?

Why did you not provide a poll so that users could leave a +1 or otherwise engage in a way that is less stressful for those with social anxiety or shyness?

If you look at the 38 comments from users so far, there is a unanimous sense of disappointment, and also of betrayal that your exercise in asking for feedback was hypocritical since you had already made up your mind to close it down.
https://otw-news.dreamwidth.org/1082477.html

I share the commenters' opinions, and further more, I would also like to state that your actions demonstrate the same pattern of contempt for OTW's users that influenced Comms policy regarding the Weibo account.

(Source: https://otw-news.dreamwidth.org/1082477.html?thread=1628781#cmt1628781)

Question asked to the Board in the OTW Public Board Meeting on 3rd July 2023

o/ Ten days ago the Board posted a statement addressed to the Chinese and Chinese-diaspora volunteers which placed the entire blame for the Weibo situation on the retired Comms chairs, disavowed any responsibility for setting policy for Comms, and which ignored the questions that the Weibo mods had asked in order to once again offer only a feedback form to collect suggestions.
There was no measure of accountability in the statement, or of concrete change.
And even though multiple voluteers explicitely used the words racism to describe the OTW's treatment, the statement conspiculously avoided any reference to racism or xenophobia.
The statement also had only this to say in regards to the two documented incidents of Alex Tischer making hostile statements that contributed to a culture of racialised harassment:
"We also want to apologize for the dismissive and inappropriate behavior of Board director Alex, who replied in German to your comments with the intention of making herself harder to understand. The Board absolutely does not condone this behavior in any way, and we are ashamed that this has taken place."
But shame cannot be the only official response for the all-white leadership of an organisation.
So how can I or any other volunteer of colour possibly trust a Board that refuses to hold their fellow Board Member accountable, or have any confidence in your capability to select a Diversity Consultant who will actually be empowered enough to advocate against the pervasive culture of racism that permeates this organisation?