Join the original 
Current Revision: 2022-02-01
A “case study” (Honestly, more of an excessively-organized recollection of anecdotes and screen shots)
by Joe Puente
1.0 The original post
[Member A] posted the following in the Utah Filmmakers™ Facebook group:
I commented on the post (n.b. I have no screenshot of it so any error in remembrance is mine) that I appreciated representation and inclusivity but I had to ask if there was a job being offered?
[Member A] eplied to the comment indicating that they were not hiring yet, just “testing the waters.”
2.0 Reasoning behind removing the post
A group poll created by Warren Workman, another group admin, on January 18, asked the question, “What do you hope to get out of the Utah Filmmakers group?...”1 The top three responses to the poll as of this writing were “Acting gigs,” “Paid work….,” and “Crew gigs.”
Knowing that the desire to find paying work is perhaps the most important reason that people join the group, over the years, the admins have established rules and guidelines to make this process more effective for both job seekers and job creators. From writing a job posting template based on input from professionals when asked about the most important information that should be included in a job post, to group rules with minimum requirements for such posts, i.e. requiring that “Payment” be the first thing to appear when seeking cast and crew. Also…
(1 https://www.facebook.com/groups/utahfilmmakers/posts/10159916341589430/)
2.1 Group Rule #5 “NOT in production? Do NOT ask for resumes”
“‘Future’ or ‘potential’ projects (i.e. those NOT CURRENTLY in production, are not scheduled, or NOT YET FUNDED) are of no use to filmmakers looking for work in the present. Do not post for jobs unless ready to hire, and NEVER suggest that a gig ‘could lead to additional work.’ No one can see the future”
[Member A]’s post did not include payment, nor was it specifically stated they were hiring anyone, but they were clearly sourcing “...DP’s, AD’s, and Producers…” which prompted my question. There being no immediate job prospects associated with the post, I removed it with feedback:
As I stated in a post to the group that evening—on the topic of “networking,”2
(2 https://www.facebook.com/groups/utahfilmmakers/posts/10159929711259430/)
3.0 Domino effect
[Member A] tagged me in a public post on their personal Facebook timeline, complaining about the removal of their post, and inferring that the reasons behind the removal were hostility toward “progressive networking”—despite the fact that the actual reasons for the post were included in the screen shot image that he shared with the post. They also told others to “beware.”
If “progressive networking” alluded to connecting with women and LGBTQIA+ filmmakers, one may infer that they are the ones that should “beware” of me. I found this to be hurtful and unfair. I consider myself an ally and I think that if [Member A] knew me better, they would recognize that.
I tried again to explain the reasons for the decision in a comment but it was deleted. I prefer to discuss such matters privately. Usually, when someone’s post is removed, if they ask me why, I tell them and offer some tips to make their future posts more effective. Having been an admin for over a decade, I have learned a few things. There’s just one drawback to this method: Group members need to be willing to communicate and understand that admin decisions are administrative and not personal.
3.2 Direct communication—albeit mostly one-way
[Member A] then messaged me to protest the removal of their group post, stating
As noted above, I recognized that [Member A] did not specifically state that they were hiring anyone, but it was the vagueness of the post and referencing key production positions that could result in many people easily inferring the possibility of paying work.
The first thing that [Member A] said to me in their direct message was,
I remembered the other posts they referenced—I even tagged the author of one in my remarks about “networking.”
3.3 Why this post and not others?
The difference between [Member A] ’s post and the others was simply a lack of context. The others were specific regarding their intentions. One wanted to donate a monitor to a new DP. Another introduced themselves with a desire to tell a personal story through film.
[Member A] ’s post sought people with specific skill sets but gave no indication as to why.
3.3.1 [Member A] did not break the rules intentionally
While the desire to network was finally made clear—albeit, only on their personal profile and in a private message—their tone shifted considerably. What began as a complaint, turned into something akin as a personal attack, going well beyond a suggestive “beware.”
3
Were it not for that sentence, I’d like to think that I’d have been willing to discuss the matter further right then. But, frankly, my feelings were hurt and I needed to process those emotions.
(3 I appreciated [Member A] s choice of words—and still do. The words “I feel” acknowledges the emotional component of the response, which is genuine and valid regardless of what prompted it. Whether or not this indicated that they could be mistaken about their perception is harder to tell but I’m willing to give them the benefit of a doubt because of their emotional honesty. It still triggered me. I wrote “akin to a personal attack” in an attempt to sound detached and objective.)
I responded,
He replied with,
That felt especially hurtful, considering the importance that I’ve placed on how the group itself should be considered a safe space.
3.4 Another administrative decision
When presented with a problem in the workplace, the professional course of action is to address the issue immediately and tactfully. If the problem is between individuals, they need to set aside personal feelings and address the root cause of said problem—privately.
We implore group members to treat the forum as they would a film set where admins and moderators are essentially the UPMs, directors, and ADs, but they’re also fellow members, part of the same crew, and subject to the same rules. Everyone has a responsibility to treat each other with courtesy and respect. When a problem or disagreement becomes evident, it’s important for everyone—participant and observer alike—to remember group rule #1:
“Professionalism is expected in all interactions.”
There’s nothing wrong with the fact that [Member A] disagreed with the removal of their post. There’s nothing wrong with their choice to express that dissatisfaction publicly on their own timeline. However, calling me out by name, tagging me, and insinuating that my motivation was prejudicial—so much so that they couched it in terms of a warning to others—was problematic. That the post was outside of the group was irrelevant because it was still seen by other group members who did not know the details of the situation.4 By the time [Member A] decided to question me in a direct message, the damage was done. That and the tone of their message is what constituted the “blatant lack of professionalism” that informed my decision to remove them from the group—but I did make the conscious choice not to block them from rejoining. [Member A] blocked my personal profile before I could answer any questions—despite a suggestion that we talk later.
That action did not help the situation.
The effect of the public post and the subsequent vitriolic comments took their toll on me. That’s when I brought the exchange to the other moderators, asking for input and guidance. The next day, someone brought up [Member A] ’s deleted post and removal from the group. I commented with:
“...[the other moderators] discussed it, and the consensus within that discussion was that the action to remove him from the group was administratively justified.”
(4 One of whom commented with a false claim that I had publicly accused them of trying to “scam” other group members. A remark that I found especially painful because it came from an individual[Member A] whose work I admire, whose brand I’ve gladly promoted, and I had invited to contribute to the Utah Filmmakers™ blog on any topic they wanted.)4.0 Fallout
As I tried to process everything, I found myself unable to concentrate on my own work, to say nothing of the demands of being a group admin.
I’m really grateful that I can count on a team of moderators who can appreciate some of the challenges that most group members are completely unaware of. While they understand my need to take a break from time to time, when I’m in the middle of just feeling what I’m feeling, no one is more supportive than my wife, Danica. She’s a 4th grade teacher, so she knows a thing or two about navigating language and differing perspectives to get one’s point across—with her students and their parents, and even her co-workers and administrators.
Danica is also a member of the Utah Filmmakers™ group and sees the same things that I see in there. But she also sees what nobody else sees: how some of these situations affect me psychologically and emotionally. During the day, when she’s at school, we’re usually limited to just texting each other.
The following is excerpted from our text messages on January 27.
Joe: …I’m kinda hurting right now.
Dani: Do you know [Member A] ?
J: … I’ve never met him.
I know this feeling. It feels like I’m being bullied. I think that I am being bullied. I’m not surprised that [Member B] is a bully.
But [Member A] is bullying me too.
He is a person who identifies as non-binary—is suggesting that I targeted him because of it—and probably knows what it feels like to be bullied. He probably doesn’t think that he’s being a bully. But if I told him, he’d probably take offense… no one else is defending me. No one who knows both of us is saying anything on his post to defend me, or tell him that he’s wrong about me.
When no one contradicts the terrible and untrue things that he and [Member B] say about me… I feel worse and start to wonder if they’re right. That no one is contradicting them because everyone else agrees…
I know that there’s nothing you can do right now. I know you’re in the middle of a long day and I’m sorry to vent to you like this but I don’t feel like there’s anyone else that I can talk to about this.
D: I hate it when these people jump into blaming you instead of looking at the content of what you said.
I know this probably won’t help, but I see these same attitudes from parents. They are so quick to blame other people for what they consider to be a wrong and they don’t take the time to think about the fact that they were presented with something in a logical and unbiased way. They immediately assume they (or their child) are being attacked. (sic)
I love you. I wish that was enough to make the hurt go away.
J: I love you too. I took some medicine.
D: Okay.
That evening, [Member A] unblocked me and shared with me a screenshot of a portion of the comment I made in the group the day before and expressed a willingness to talk.
I responded:
5.0 Application
Having not heard from [Member A] as of the current revision of this memo. I decided that the
best way to process all of this was to write about it. To try and put it all into perspective, and figure out what can be learned from the experience.
5.1 What was the “inciting incident”?
5.1.1 The wrong answer that jumps to the front of the line
While my initial response to this question is, “The rules are right there! The posting template makes it so easy!” it’s an obvious deflection so I’m going to just suck it up and own it.
5.1.2 The actual answer
The inciting incident occured when I assumed—incorrectly—that the feedback provided with the removal of the post would be enough of an explanation for the decision.
For some people such feedback is all they need but no two people are alike.
5.2 What motivated the decision to remove the post?
My focus was trained on the crew positions that were mentioned. My reasoning from that point is explained in §2.
5.3 What did I miss?
I did not stop to consider that[Member A] ’s wish to identify filmmakers in marginalized communities could be perceived as the reason for the post’s removal.
5.4 What could have been done differently?
Considering what I had subsequently written in the post I referenced in §2.1, as well as Warren’s #IntroChallenge—which arose from a conversation that he and I had about the situation—and because hindsight is always 20/20, that’s a question that’s much more easily answered!
Instead of deleting posts like this, it would be more helpful to recommend that the author edit their post as a personal introduction to more effectively communicate their wish to network and connect with other filmmakers that share common but possibly atypical experiences.
6.0 Conclusion
I wrote this to process my feelings about the situation but I think there might be some information here that could benefit others. I think I’ll share it with the other moderators.
[Prepared by J.L. Puente]
