Welcome Ayya! 
Yes! Good point. A lot has been said about right speech and guessing at various people’s motivations on both sides of this issue.
Disclosing Associations
Ayya @AhimsaBhikkhuni, In the interests of integrity, openness and clarity, it’s probably a good idea for people who are commenting here to disclose if they had a close association with the book. This might be useful to help readers navigate the thread and as you point out, to see the nuances between intention and impact more clearly. I understand you’re a resident of Aloka Vihara, and probably had some interactions with Matty during the creation of the book? He talks about working on the poems with all the residents in his various interviews. Whilst you didn’t mention it, I also remember that you were one of the several nuns from Aloka Vihara who provided a public endorsement of the book for Shambala’s marketing materials.
This is important to disclose because readers should be made aware when a commentator already has some ‘skin in the game’ . We should be allowed to know about any vested interests caused by a close association with the issue, as this no doubt affects what is said. I was really glad to see your co-resident at Aloka Vihara, Ayya Niyyanika, disclose this above, as I felt it was the right thing to do, to make that connection known and clear. It’s vital that when reading responses from our friends from Aloka Vihara, that people know the book was written at Aloka Vihara over a long period, with a huge amount of input from the co-founder and senior-most nun, Ayya Anandabodhi (she called herself the ‘editor in chief’ of the book and talked about her strong desire to get the poems out into the world) and we are told other residents were involved with the poems too, and we know that they enthusiastically promoted it, using it in teachings for over a year.
So it’s vital to acknowledge this close association when it comes to threads like this where readers might not be aware of the prior involvement of our interlocutors. After all, people so close to the creation of this work and involved in it’s promotion and use, cannot be said to be neutral or unbiased; especially when criticising others, so this should be made known. As you say, Ayya, you joined the forum especially to have a say on this issue, and without guessing at your intentions, not disclosing your connection to the book might reasonably affect the impact of your words on others. Your comments might be seen quite differently if that connection was disclosed to them at the time, right?
In many ways, this disclosing of facts is similar to the major concerns people had about the integrity of the book itself. That’s not at all to say that people associated with the book and it’s promotion shouldn’t have a voice or cant chime in on public forums discussing it , or defend their views on it, or correct mistakes etc—no, I’m not saying that at all! In fact I think it’s great that you are here, and I really look forward to your contributions on this and the many other lively discussions on the forum, but just to clarify; it seems you are not here because of the EBTs, or accidentally, or merely as a bystander but rather, have joined today for a particular purpose.
Picking scabs and Shifting Blame
Many of us thought this whole affair was over and done with. 
Apparently not!
One important thing to note in the development of this thread and conversation off the forum is the shifting of blame. Let’s not pretend that it was the Library of Congress’ fault that the book was incorrectly catalogued, or even pretend that the problems with the book can merely be reduced to an unfortunate ‘category error’. This trivialises the already well-articulated concerns of the many people on this forum and in many other places who criticised the book for misrepresenting our sacred texts, for mischaracterising the Dhamma, for impersonating Theris and many other concerns, including how this book was allowed to happen in the first place.
And now we are back discussing it all again… Let’s remember that it has now been raised—not by the people who criticised the book or anyone on this forum—but rather it has been intentionally brought up now by someone who was intimately involved in it’s creation, in a blog post on their monastery website. Although, ostensibly an apology, it feels like an attempt is being made to shift the blame and critique the response to the book for being less than perfect , rather than focus on any responsibility for the less than perfect presentation and promotion of the book itself. It seems that the quality and tone of the critical response is a big concern for the Aloka nuns who have commented here and that this has now become a major issue for them. Okay sure! The response and criticism of the book probably wasn’t perfect. But let’s be honest about where the fault lies and acknowledge that it was the creation and promotion of this book that led firstly to confusion and consternation, then to division and disharmony, and also to hurt and mistrust between the lay community and the sangha. Let’s be truthful and see that by bringing it up again now in the manner it was done has actually caused even more hurt and division, and re-opened old wounds that had only just begun to scab over. Once again we are all revisiting hurt and disharmony, feeling renewed anguish and reliving the trauma of this issue. Once more we are discussing this book here instead of the actual suttas, and now, even more participants have joined in afresh. How did this happen? Who is it that has caused this?? Who is responsible?
On What is Truly Sad
I understand you are sad about the negative impacts of the book and especially, as you say, especially sad for “the participants of the conflict”. I also understand that you have a real interest in good communication and an interest in repairing the bad state of “‘Buddhist’ communication” as exhibited here. It’s true that there is a very sad situation here, but let’s not forget why and how things happened, otherwise it’s like shifting the blame away from the real causes of this issue. There was poor communication. The poor communication that I am saddened by was the promotion of this book. You are saddened by the subsequent criticism of that promotion and how it happened. You are worried about the “participants of the conflict as well as those who looked on with dismay at the state of “Buddhist” communications.” My feeling is that at least the participants here knew what was going on. The people I feel sad for are those who were unwittingly duped by lies and fraudulent marketing into thinking this was a translation of a sacred text by women. I feel sad for those people who were lead astray by members of our sangha, who promoted and spoke of this book as a translation of the Therigatha and who taught it as Dhamma, I’m sad for those people who told me they lost faith after realising they were deceived by the sangha they trusted. I feel sad for Matty who should have been properly guided by his monastic mentors to know the difference between fantasy and translation of our shared sacred texts for which we are all responsible, and I feel sad for the tradition that these poems were falsely promoted as the Dhamma of the Theris over and over again by people who actually knew that this was not the case but did it anyway. If there is to be any criticism about “Buddhist” communication, surely this is where ire should be directed, not towards those who pointed the deception out?
This doesnt mean that people shouldnt be challenged for how the response to the scandal went down. But I beg those who were involved in creating it not to judge others toooo harshly and to keep their judgements proportional to the harm caused.
The Forum
There has been some criticism of the forum, whatever 'the forum" means, it probably means something different to everyone on it! It’s certainly not a monolithic or singular entity but instead it’s a very loosely aligned group of hundreds of individuals from all over the world, all with very different views and opinions. Yes. There was some fallout for people from FFW in this domain. As mentioned above, it seems that this has become the main issue for the nuns of Aloka Vihara and for other unnamed people. If only the book had not been written and promoted in a deceptive way, any subsequent fallout would have been avoided. Let’s not shoot the messenger here. Let’s also not police people’s tone, or say that the actual problem is with how some people handled their criticisms. Sure, things might have been done better - when facing the biggest Buddhist literary scandal of our time, hindsight would be a fine thing! People get emotional. They cared. They felt misled and betrayed. They felt small against a major publisher and a massive marketing machine. They wanted to be heard, for the truth to be out there. But whilst mistakes may have been made in communicating the unrest and injustice felt, and although passions may have been high, these on-the-go mis-steps don’t compare at all to the sustained untruths perpetrated by the creation and promotion of the book over a long period of time, done on the international stage to many communities and individuals who gave their trust to us as sangha and who believed the marketing and hype. This is but a small forum with very limited reach… All this surely needs to be held in perspective by those who were responsible for the book, and not glossed over lightly in favour for criticising others. Getting a bit huffy or excitable is not the best communication, sure. Having strident views isn’t great, either maybe… but misrepresenting the Dhamma? That is not at all a trivial thing and has far worse consequences.
Remember also that attempts were made with the publisher and author and that those attempts did not work out. The issue escalated only because of entrenched reluctance to do something about it by those who were responsible; this was avoidable. Sure, people may have gotten a bit ‘shouty’ but they were simply not being heard by the people in charge.
It’s been said that some people felt like they couldn’t speak up or have different views on the forum and that this shows there was a failure of Buddhist communication by D&D. By making this the new focus in the apology essay, there is a shifting of the issue and a deflection of blame toward those who raised the problems, rather than those who caused them. In re-positioning the forum as the real problem that needs to be dealt with to correct poor communication, we might easily forget that the whole FFW scandal was an absolute travesty of honesty and was a “Buddhist communication” disaster; causing deception, mistrust, confusion, consternation, division, disharmony and conflict . So, in the context of all this fallout, in the process of making an apology for misleading the public, this targeting of “the forum” for poor communication seems a bit much, really.
This forum is well moderated and people are cared for here. From time to time issues of poor communication occur, such as with the FFW, They were dealt with in several ways, but the important things is that it was dealt with. There were consequences and there was responsibility taken by all sides. There will be more disagreements in the future but hopefully there will be no more Buddhist literary scandals!
I understand for some people there are still personal barriers to vocal participation, but even if they feel shy to speak up, they always, always have the option of doing so at any time. If you are worried about a prevalence of views or an echo chamber but do nothing to prevent it; speak up! That doesn’t mean that our perspectives won’t be challenged or that there wont be disagreements - it’s a discussion forum, after all, there’s a dialogue, that’s the whole point, that people can participate and reply, as long as they dont break any of the forum rules. In that sense it’s quite different to a monastery blog, or a book, or newsletter or something like that, in that people have the right to reply and it happens in a public way. People can get involved, which obviously has both benefits and downsides and can be a testing ground for right speech! People who complain about being silenced in a post on the forum are very much being heard! I’d like to point out that people engage in this forum willingly, and in full awareness. The same cannot be said for those who were misled by this book. So, again, when facing criticism, that’s something that also needs to be held in balance. People weren’t arguing here for the sake of it, but because they were genuinely concerned for the preservation of the Dhamma and for the truth about the book to be known.
Praise and Blame, the Public Frame
Although it’s been a bit hard and a bit messy, it’s so incredibly important that this all happened in the public eye and was not hushed away or stifled or shut-down in any way. Why? The promotion of the book was public, the celebrity endorsements of the book were public, the rave reviews were public, the author talks and podcasts were public, the retreats and meditation sessions and Dhamma talks based on it were public. The deception was practised on the public and thus needed to be addressed publicly, in full view, in high profile and in strong criticism—in order to counter the glowing yet misleading narrative around the book. It was, in fact, not the Therigatha. It was not the words of women. It was not the Dhamma.
Whilst the praise was coming in thick and fast, everyone was raving about the book, no-one was at all bothered that this was all happening in the public domain. No-one thought it was a problem. No-one thought about the people being deceived or worried about their feelings. No-one thought about right speech and truthfulness of what was being peddled. No-one cared about the harm being done to our communities or the damage to the reputation of the Sangha and the Dhamma.
But, yet, once the criticism started appearing, suddenly all the rules changed; Despite lies being told and people misled, suddenly, everyone else’s speech is made the issue, not the lies we were told. And if people wanted to participate in discussing the problems, for some reason they must be held to an even higher standard of accountability than those who were responsible for this fraud? This is more important? I’m sorry, what just happened? It’s the old switcheroo. Despite the huge promotion and public place of the book, somehow criticism of it should only be done in hushed secrecy, away from the public where it really mattered most?? Suddenly instead of right speech being the issue we needed to address, it becomes a weapon to be used against those who speak out about lies and deception. Next, we are told we are “unBuddhist”, we are the ones causing shame and we are the ones doing harm, that we have trashedthe reputation of the Dhamma and Sangha! Now we are blamed, and told that we should have followed this thing or done this or that, or what about this quote of Dhamma and how dare you say something critical etc etc etc - none of which mattered a jot to the people responsible for the creating or promoting the book, nor mattered at all during the upward cycle of Praise! This is shifting the standards, deflecting valid blame away from those responsible and changing the playing field against those pointed out the deception. Public silence and secrecy would only send a message that it’s okay to visit a major deception misrepresenting the Buddha Dhamma to the public.
Even though there have been consequences to speaking out, I am glad to have done it. And actually, it needed to be done. That doesn’t mean I want to keep doing it though!! This is enough 
I have spent long enough dealing with the problems brought into our world by the FFW. I admit I may have made a few errors here and there, such as calling Aloka Vihara “Aloka Hermitage” - sorry! Sure, I used strong language in my criticism of the author and publisher, I think it was proportional to the situation, but I could be wrong. If so, please forgive me and know that I don’t wish any of the creators of the book any harm at all. Genuinely, with sincerity, may they be happy!
I apologise and ask for forgiveness if I have upset anyone else or hurt anyone, or if my communication fell short of the high standards we expect from monastics.
Onwards and Upwards
One thing I am very grateful for was that this whole thing inspired me to suggest to my friend that we should create a series of talks by monastic women about the poems of the Theris in order to re-center their real verses and highlight authentic voices of Dhamma. This started out as small series of recorded chats about the verses of the Theris, but subsequently and unexpectedly became a whole festival! It was a lot of work but it was an amazing experience for me. I got to learn so much more about the Theris and to hear from so many learned monastic women who have so much knowledge and wisdom. I was so happy that I was able to positively contribute to the real Theri’s becoming more known in the public eye . It was great to connect with monastics from all over the world to explore these inspiring poems. They are perfect just as they are. The Therigatha Festival talks have received thousands of views on youtube and I’m so happy that people have found it beneficial.
For me, this festival was about returning to our core values.