SoylentNews

Am I the bad guy here?

They say that Al Capone couldn't understand why the press hated him. He thought of himself as the "good guy", who had done so much for Chicago that the city should be grateful.

I understand how he must have felt.

To date I've tried to be positive, upbeat, and helpful during the transition - turning over accounts and passwords, answering questions, providing help where needed. I initially gave Michael passwords for everything about the project, including the registrar.

SoylentNews was pushing probably 7 million pageviews a month. Some acceptable [to the community] advertizing and it could have net $10,000/month. Despite this, Michael doesn't want to reimburse me $2,000 for startup costs.

Michael's behaviour is so *rotten* that I just cannot fathom it. I'm also baffled as to why the staff is being mean. Because of this I've taken back some of the account access: the registrar and my three linode accounts. I'm tired of being shat upon, and I need to look after my own interests.

Since the change in ownership, the site worth has dropped from $2700 to $470, the stark reality of the "palace revolt".

The truth is, no one wants to see dirty laundry. I crafted my resignation in a politically neutral manner because I was taught that it's not appropriate to say bad things in public. Michael's hit piece came as a complete shock.

This whole thing started because one person didn't like someone else's choice of OS, and couldn't let it go and couldn't put it off, even for 2 weeks. I've read about these types of religious wars, choice of editor being another one, but I never thought that people would go to these sorts of extremes. I wonder if "can't let it go" will be a recurring theme.

Throughout the transition, only a *single* staff member showed integrity, and only two showed any sense of loyalty.

I did my best to accommodate people, to give them important positions with interesting tasks, encouraging them to experiment and be creative, and most of all to grow. As an example, Michael originally declined being head of dev. He wanted the position, but felt that his people skills were not up to the task (he said this in so many words). After much thought and deliberation I came up with a plan to pair him with Mattie, a professional manager, to work on his management skills and help him grow into the position. I made special arrangements to give Michael the best seat in the house because he deserved it.

It came as a complete surprise that none of the editors were happy (per Michael's piece). No one had complained, I had several conversations with the head of that section and sat in on their group meeting.

Overlords had specific authority to decide split consensus, they were told this when they were made overlords (per my script). At the time of the revolt, none of the overlords had complained or even asked about this. Mattie had full authority to resolve disputes between groups, it was stated in so many words in the E-mail. I don't know how Michael thought otherwise, especially in light of the E-mail record. Michael was an overlord and was specifically told all of this.

This sordid affair has left me soured on the entire community. Slashdot users think we're a bunch of spoiled crybabies, and 'ya know what? I agree. I'm not a member of this community, and now that I'm an outcast I see that I don't *want* to be a member.

I'm not a nerd, I'm a scientist. Go do your own thing, I wash my hands of you.

UPDATE

I've had several offers for the site - thank you. I'm contacting the first one and then I'm gone.