I don’t know the rights and wrongs of what Danna Colman is alleged to have done.
“As editors[,] we uphold the integrity and ethical standards of the Coffeelicious”
If this letter represents an example of you upholding those standards, then they are in serious need of review for this letter represents a serious breach of ethical conduct, is in contravention of Natural Justice, and also reverses the convention of “innocent until proven guilty”.
Indeed, it negates any opportunity for Danna to receive a fair hearing and will inevitably colour the attitudes of some who read it and who don’t know the full facts of the issue.
“Dishonorably discharge” is a loaded term.
“Favoritism” is most often an opinion of a complainant and may be a misunderstanding of an action or actions taken for perfectly valid reasons. Writing is usually a very personal activity and one into which the author invests much. Many authors have an inflated notion of their own competence or the likely appeal of their work to others. What may have constituted reasonable selection decisions on Danna’s part may have caused others to feel overlooked or disregarded, even if that was not the case.
“Spats with Medium writers”
I don’t know the details of these “spats” but I do know that I have had a serious concern about the ideas, opinionated views, and misconceptions of at least as many Medium contributions as those that I have admired. I also know that “it takes two to tango” and I wonder whether those on the other end of these “spats” have received any sort of admonition or caution about their words.
“Serious concerns of plagiarism”
If this is true then there is certainly cause for concern. It is the only legitimate factor, of those you have suggested, for Danna to be considered as unsuitable for an editorial role. However, as this is given as an allegation and not as fact, you have provided no evidence in your letter to support your unprincipled open publication of a letter of allegations that includes such demeaning rhetoric as “dishonorable discharge”. It would not surprise me to discover that you may have given Danna cause for legal proceedings against all who are responsible for posting this scurrilous piece of prose.
Even were the allegations all to have been proven or prove to be true, it would remain a totally improper action to have published such a letter. A far more professional and proper action would have been to keep the matter “in-house”, to use an independent mediator to review the allegations and, if found to be true, to ask Danna to voluntarily resign her position. That resignation could then have been simply noted for the benefit of readers and any that required further information could have been directed to contact Danna directly and that it would be improper for the Editorial Committee to make any further comment.
As you may have gathered, I am disgusted by your post and extremely concerned that those of you remaining on the Editorial Committee have acted in such a way. I wonder if you shouldn’t all stand down, if this is an example of your misguided undertanding of what constitutes “ethics” and professionalism.
