During the server names discussion, all of the board members were engaged in long and intense conversations. We meet via chat each week, and the subject of server names and diversity occupied the bulk of several meetings; it also took place over email and chat. Many people within the org, who serve on various committees and were involved with the server name poll in various ways, came to board meetings to argue passionately for one solution or another, and we listened and asked questions and then talked some more.

What I personally did was participate in those conversations and try to help the board reach consensus on the immediate question of how to handle the results of the server name voting, while also trying to keep an eye on the reality that the issue of fannish diversity is far bigger than this one server name poll.

One thing I've done since the server name poll is initiate a conversation among board members about how each of us sees the org and our mission, and how each of us understands the mission statement's call to "serve the interests of fans by providing access to and preserving the history of fanworks and fan culture in its myriad forms." Another board member has initiated a brainstorming session about the org's diversity initiatives and how we can do better in future. This week's board meeting is slated to be dedicated to those two conversations.

Does this answer your question?