The journal's worth reading in full. While internal dissent over policies is one reason to leave, it seems the personal attacks on her and other FA staff were a significant factor. There is a line: it's when you criticise the person, rather than the decision.
Most staff see this from time to time, at least if they are identifiable as the person behind a particular action. It doesn't help when those you deal with tend to be people who have broken the rules, or who're angry about what they see as violations. Explaining to the latter that, actually, it isn't a violation, rarely goes over well.
It's possible for a mob to drive someone out of a staff position, depending on the situation. This is rarely good for the site, or its community - volunteers do not grow on trees, and in fandom they often hold highly-skilled roles and/or leadership positions; replacing them is non-trivial. Meanwhile, the remaining staff also have to deal with the former volunteer's job until a replacement is found (or else it's just not done). Unfortunately, those most likely to do this - those who already aren't using [x] - also tend to have the least to lose if things go downhill.
The journal's worth reading in full. While internal dissent over policies is one reason to leave, it seems the personal attacks on her and other FA staff were a significant factor. There is a line: it's when you criticise the person, rather than the decision.
Most staff see this from time to time, at least if they are identifiable as the person behind a particular action. It doesn't help when those you deal with tend to be people who have broken the rules, or who're angry about what they see as violations. Explaining to the latter that, actually, it isn't a violation, rarely goes over well.
It's possible for a mob to drive someone out of a staff position, depending on the situation. This is rarely good for the site, or its community - volunteers do not grow on trees, and in fandom they often hold highly-skilled roles and/or leadership positions; replacing them is non-trivial. Meanwhile, the remaining staff also have to deal with the former volunteer's job until a replacement is found (or else it's just not done). Unfortunately, those most likely to do this - those who already aren't using [x] - also tend to have the least to lose if things go downhill.