Post 41.5, part II -- Assumptions, sequence, and outcomes.

I have been having a discussion on Twitter with @31Dobe. His questions to me have prompted me to write once more on the topic of AirPlay's organizer Koretzky's Update 6. My attempt is to lay out certain assumptions I have used to come to my conclusion that Koretzky was entirely in the right to post Update 6 (and Update 7), despite the endless complaints and poor parley from Campbell.

Base Assumption: order of events.

1. Update 3 with the 1000 to 1050 introduction slot.
2. Update 5 and the new 1000 to 1015 introduction slot; did not notify panelists of this.
3. Skype call with Campbell, Ceb, Bokhari.
4. Koretzky joins Skype call, argues with Campbell.
5. Koretzky posts Update 6 illuminating Campbell's antics.
6. Campbell starts a Google Hangout stream going through Koretzky's Update 6.
7. Campbell cancels.

First Assumption: Time allotment and formats may change as the event is finalized.

Most events will undergo several adjustments to nearly all their facets, including date, location, speakers, time slots, and so forth. As an event is being organized, those invited to participate in the event will be told the event may change as it develops. Factors which may influence these adjustments are endless, but we can assume the number and quality of the speakers, expected attendance, confirmed support staff, and research into the topic at hand. I doubt this event is any different.

At the bottom of the schedule page, Koretzky has written, "Everything is subject to change, and that's the object." The third assumption will take this into account along with why Update 6 can go up free of "off the record!" complaints.

Koretzky, it appears, offered to do his best to keep panelists in the loop of important changes, if he hadn't, there would never have been a basis for Campbell's blow up. A nice gesture by an organizer and moderator who will be stretched thin in the preparation for his big event.

In Update 3, Koretzky laid out the schedule for the event: begins at 1000 with an introduction to Gamergate, going until 1050. Starting at 11, the panelists will focus in on specific examples and events to give context to the basis and the greater aims of Gamergate. Lunch is from noon until 1300. Following the lunch break, the discussion expands more, this time with input from the audience. The camera crew is done at 1500, but the building is rented until 1700, giving even longer engagement on the specifics and philosophical elements of Gamergate.

Update 5 changed the definitions and time allotted: introductions were now from 1000 to 1015 and the expansion to specifics runs from 1015 to noon. This can only be described as a minor change. There is no panel reorganization and the total time for introductions and specifics is still two hours.

Second Assumption: The time change sparked a discussion among some panelists.

Koretzky did not inform the panelists of the time allotment change, probably because it was so minor and does not take away from the total time allowed. I see nothing wrong with this, as it really is inconsequential to the panelists; understand, however, that it matters to those who are attending--when you see an introduction segment of 50 minutes (or "an hour" as it was continually referred to), it can be off putting for potential attendees.

Campbell et al. engaged in what started as a discussion on how this might affect their approach to the time allowed. Campbell's follow-up stream to Update 6 shows how Campbell was hyper focused on keeping an hour of talking for introduction (yet, fervently disagreeing with Koretzky on Twitter about asking for that "hour"). Campbell's Skype conversation with Ceb and Bokhari was about the needs to have Koretzky explain why he never notified the panelists of the (minor) change (still a month out from the event).

Campbell admits the Skype call was about two hours in length prior to Koretzky joining it. Campbell also admits that he yelled at and ignored Koretzky's requests to get back to Campbell at a more convenient time (here, there is much ambiguity, as no one can agree on whether Koretzky joined to discuss at length or had a few minutes to explain the change). Nonetheless, Campbell remained on the offensive. Eventually Campbell left the Skype call, which he admits to doing. From here on, the conversation was with Bokhari, Ceb, and Koretzky. Ceb, in Campbell's follow up stream (posted above), admits that he and Bokhari were attempting to smooth things over. Campbell did apologize before leaving the call, but also described it as "putting our dicks on the table"--the sort of vapid rhetoric that illustrates the emotional frailty of the approach rather than it's logical merits.

Third Assumption: The apologies concluded the discussion, leaving it open to be discussed in public.

On the AirPlay Update's page, Koretzky openly states that he will be open about the process. Moreover, that his updates are to show the planning efforts so they may be scrutinized. Accepting to be a panelist means you are aware that you will be written about. There is no protection or "off the record" work, unless Koretzky and a participant agrees. Assuming that all conversations with Koretzky will be kept wholly private is folly and blatantly ignorant.

Koretzky's transparency here allows all interested parties to scrutinize the planning and participants conduct in the planning process. Campbell wrongfully felt (feelz before realz, though) he was disrespected because he was not consulted on the minor change. Further, that the Update 6 which followed his embarrassing and contemptible actions in the Skype conversation was uncalled for.

Well, Campbell is just wrong on that point: this event is indifferent to the issue. It is merely bringing light to a conversation about ethics in journalism. Gamergate is not the first time journalists have been unethical, so it's not breaking new ground. As such, the event organizer does not have to extend any special treatment to panelists simply because they "feel disrespected".

Final thoughts on the Campbell debacle--hopefully.

Campbell was wrong to assume his conversations with Koretzky were going to be off the record, especially with how he acted towards Koretzky in the Skype call. Following the apologies, one can reasonably conclude the matter was over. Without the actual recording of that call, it is difficult to tell, though--especially considering Campbell was not in the call the entire time Koretzky was.

With the matter over, and Koretzky's pledge to keep this process transparent so it may be scrutinized, Koretzky posts Update 6, and rightfully so. Ask yourself here: has your opinion of Campbell changed since? Without a doubt.

There really isn't much more to say on this now. After all, Campbell has withdrawn from attending and is working on refunding the money offered up to aid in him traveling to Miami.

Campbell has since blocked me on Twitter, which I can take as a victory. His self-righteous sense entitlement was easy to pick apart, and his true nature showed. Campbell, while able to write about his struggles, is not as tough as he lets on. Willing to bark at anything that challenges him, he fails to convince anyone in discourse. When he is roundly defeated on the larger topic, he immediately shifts to smaller and more specific complaints (e.g., and "hour" of time was wrong, as he was asking for the Update 3 allotment of 50 minutes, so when Koretzky stated Campbell was asking for "an hour", Campbell called Koretzky a liar--yes, that pedantic).

Moving on from this is easy. Not only did Campbell show himself unfit to represent even himself, something Gamergate can be thankful for, but the panelists remaining are in it for the ideals. Campbell stated he would be done with Gamergate following AirPlay, which calls into question his real willingness to do this, other than get a free ride to Miami. In fact, Campbell even tweeted out "It would have been nice to see the ocean for the first time in my life." (I best be careful here, I might not have got ever key stroke perfect in that quote, and he might come after me for it.)

So, let's move on from Campbell and his failings which has created a pointless spectacle. He is now worthless to Gamergate, something he was already teetering on as is, and offers nothing more to the discourse. Eyes on AirPlay will be vast and intensely interested. Milo, 'Based Mom', Alum, Ceb, and Cathy will do an excellent job with introduction, specifics, and debates on why this all matters. With Campbell gone, the event, and Gamergate's opportunity, has become better--and we can all thank Koretzky for that.

This has been an unedited rant. @nrokchi