Using the name "NVC Evolves"
7 views
Skip to first unread message
Conal Elliott
Mar 10, 2008, 2:32:27 PM3/10/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hi Jim,
(continuing from the "google or yahoo" thread)
Thanks for raising your concerns.
> I do have some concerns about the name NVC Evolves. The need not met
> for me in the title of the group relates to connection with CNVC and
> its requests around the use of the initials NVC for non-certified
> trainers.*
I'd love to connect with what need you're going for here, and I'm nearly clueless at this point -- just that it is somehow related to these CNVC requests. Do you have more internal clarity you can share with me about your needs? I'm guessing you'd prefer I responded from inspiration rather than obedience. I know I would! :)
By the way, I've reflected long on those CNVC requests, and I've explored them with others. I am still looking forward to connecting with the heart of the matter. I wonder at this point whether anyone at CNVC has a clear need connection with these requests. I'm up for helping find that basis or, if already found, to help CNVC communicate it more effectively. (So "message sent is message received".)
> I have an additional concern related to clarity, because the CNVC
> Board has an Evolution Committee in formation.
Wow! I didn't know about that committee. Hooray for more evolution!
> I don't want this
> group to sow confusion or discord in the organization.
When I picture the evolution process in Nature, I sure don't picture a single organized effort. Quite the opposite. I picture lots and lots of creative experiments going on in different directions with loose and dynamic connections. A bottom-up process with emergent results. Serving Life in unpredictable ways.
So I wonder what confusion you're imagining. I wonder if you think people will expect there to be only one group participating in NVC's evolution and why you might expect that?
Perhaps CNVC's committee is more about conscious steering (control) than participating in evolution (emergence). If so, I'm fine what that. It's a creative experiment, too! The name "Evolution Committee" might lead to some confusion, however. I sure get a dissonance in seeing those two words juxtaposed! :) Perhaps "Steering Committee" might convey the intention more successfully, though I'm guessing at the intention for now. Or just name it whatever and sort out confusion later.
Rather than avoiding potential discord, I'd prefer to steer into the real heart of the issues, where the gold is, and through the heart to all needs met fully! I want to take advantage of our shared skills and intentions to connect and Make Life Wonderful, and come out all the richer. How about you, Jim? Want to dance with me?
> Would you be
> willing to consider some other name, perhaps "Evolving the
> Consciousness of Connection"?
Yum. And, I'd like to connect deeply at the needs level before going to strategies.
Namaste, - Conal
(continuing from the "google or yahoo" thread)
Thanks for raising your concerns.
> I do have some concerns about the name NVC Evolves. The need not met
> for me in the title of the group relates to connection with CNVC and
> its requests around the use of the initials NVC for non-certified
> trainers.*
I'd love to connect with what need you're going for here, and I'm nearly clueless at this point -- just that it is somehow related to these CNVC requests. Do you have more internal clarity you can share with me about your needs? I'm guessing you'd prefer I responded from inspiration rather than obedience. I know I would! :)
By the way, I've reflected long on those CNVC requests, and I've explored them with others. I am still looking forward to connecting with the heart of the matter. I wonder at this point whether anyone at CNVC has a clear need connection with these requests. I'm up for helping find that basis or, if already found, to help CNVC communicate it more effectively. (So "message sent is message received".)
> I have an additional concern related to clarity, because the CNVC
> Board has an Evolution Committee in formation.
Wow! I didn't know about that committee. Hooray for more evolution!
> I don't want this
> group to sow confusion or discord in the organization.
When I picture the evolution process in Nature, I sure don't picture a single organized effort. Quite the opposite. I picture lots and lots of creative experiments going on in different directions with loose and dynamic connections. A bottom-up process with emergent results. Serving Life in unpredictable ways.
So I wonder what confusion you're imagining. I wonder if you think people will expect there to be only one group participating in NVC's evolution and why you might expect that?
Perhaps CNVC's committee is more about conscious steering (control) than participating in evolution (emergence). If so, I'm fine what that. It's a creative experiment, too! The name "Evolution Committee" might lead to some confusion, however. I sure get a dissonance in seeing those two words juxtaposed! :) Perhaps "Steering Committee" might convey the intention more successfully, though I'm guessing at the intention for now. Or just name it whatever and sort out confusion later.
Rather than avoiding potential discord, I'd prefer to steer into the real heart of the issues, where the gold is, and through the heart to all needs met fully! I want to take advantage of our shared skills and intentions to connect and Make Life Wonderful, and come out all the richer. How about you, Jim? Want to dance with me?
> Would you be
> willing to consider some other name, perhaps "Evolving the
> Consciousness of Connection"?
Yum. And, I'd like to connect deeply at the needs level before going to strategies.
Namaste, - Conal
On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 10:54 PM, nvctrainer <nvctr...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, Conal,
[...]
I do have some concerns about the name NVC Evolves. The need not met
for me in the title of the group relates to connection with CNVC and
its requests around the use of the initials NVC for non-certified
trainers.*
I have an additional concern related to clarity, because the CNVC
Board has an Evolution Committee in formation. I don't want this
group to sow confusion or discord in the organization. Would you be
willing to consider some other name, perhaps "Evolving the
Consciousness of Connection"?
Warmly,
Jim
* From cnvc.org: Can we say that we are "NVC trainers"?
Please refrain from creating any promotional materials that might
imply you are certified or sponsored by CNVC, including using the term
"NVC trainer", "NVC" or "Nonviolent Communication" on any media or
materials such as business cards, brochures, email addresses or
websites.
We request that you inform all participants in your trainings that you
are not certified by CNVC as a trainer; however, feel free to provide
information about your own NVC training history and work and life
experiences.
http://cnvc.org/guidelines_en.htm
Jim Manske
Global Community Circle
The Center for Nonviolent Communication
http://groups.google.com/group/cnvcgcc
http://en.nvcwiki.com/index.php/CNVC_GCC
http://cnvc.org
Conal Elliott
Mar 10, 2008, 2:41:39 PM3/10/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
This discussion is very dear to me, and I'd like it to be easy for people to find later. For that reason, I'd love to see people respond on this newer thread rather than on "google or yahoo?". (A request, not a demand.)
Smiles, - Conal
Smiles, - Conal
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Eric Mosley <activepe...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jim;
You addressed your post to Conal, and I'm replying because I am happy
to have this opportunity to reconnect with you. I appreciate your
comments on your experience with yahoo and google because I too use
both groups and am often wondering how to make them work more easily.
I'm intrigued by your request for a change to the name of this
group. I hear you wanting to create and contribute to harmony among
the various people interested in NVC, and especially wanting to keep
clarity around what is and is not within the domain and control of
CNVC, is that correct?
I enjoy the name NVC Evolves because it meets my desire for clarity
because I think that is exactly what this discussion group is about.
I think that everything evolves or becomes extinct, and I like
working with nvc because doing so aids my understanding of human
behavior. Having this open group discussing the use and development
of nvc, not limited by someone's judgment of who should or should not
be in the discussion, meets my desires for fairness and autonomy.
Obviously the CNVC group does not meet my desires for participation
or openness.
The group name you suggested does not work for me, in part because it
does not connect to the process of nvc, which is what I think we are
talking about. Marshall tagged NVC as a "language". It seems to me
that languages evolve through usage, uncontrolled and uncontrollable,
at best followed such as the OED does with the english language.
Underlying your request I hear a desire to control the usage of NVC.
I wonder if the CNVC group calls themselves CNVC Evolves if that
would be enough clarity for you? That distinction would work for me,
of course, that is why I suggested it. :) Don't know what Conal and
others think or how they feel about your request, although I'm
guessing your post may have stimulated part of E.G.'s post?
Take care Jim, I hope all is well with you and your family.
with love,
Eric
On Mar 9, 2008, at 12:54 AM, nvctrainer wrote:
Hi, Conal,
nvctrainer
Mar 11, 2008, 3:15:05 PM3/11/08
to NVC Evolves
Hi, Conal,
I'm pleased to continue the discussion here, and grateful for the
clarity of splitting the thread.
You wrote: Thanks for raising your concerns.
My response: You're welcome.
> I do have some concerns about the name NVC Evolves. The need not met
> for me in the title of the group relates to connection with CNVC and
> its requests around the use of the initials NVC for non-certified
> trainers.*
You wrote: I'd love to connect with what need you're going for here,
connecting with my needs.
You wrote: Do you have more internal clarity you can share with me
about
your needs?
I'm surprised the needs are hard for you to parse out, and I regret
that I was not as clear as I would like to be.
I said in my initial email, "The need not met for me in the title of
the group relates to CONNECTION with CNVC and its requests around the
use of the initials NVC for non-certified trainers.* " The asterisk
referred readers to a quote from CNVC's policies as represented on
CNVC's website.
I'm guessing you're needing clarity on how I'm using the word
"connection" in this respect, is that so?
For me, connection means I'm aware of and responsive to the life
energy moving in myself and others. When I'm meeting my need for
connection, say with the organization called CNVC, I'm focusing my
empathic awareness on the needs of the people representing the
organization. In this case, the Board and leaders of CNVC have chosen
to adopt a policy requesting that the terms "NVC trainer", "NVC" or
"Nonviolent Communication" be used only by certified trainers. The
concern I hear in the request is that others using the terms "might
imply" a "sponsorship" by CNVC of the person or organization using
those terms. Thus a need for CLARITY-what is the relationship between
CNVC and the person offering "NVC training"? There are many layers to
this clarity, including, "Is what this person is offering 'NVC'"? i.e.
the body of work represented by CNVC?"
I'm guessing CNVC would like folks to understand clearly that if they
see the phrases Nonviolent Communication, NVC trainer, etc on a flyer,
website, whatever, that there is a clear connection between the person
producing the flyer, website, training, etc and CNVC.
Does that provide any clarity to you? (It helps me to remember that
CNVC is an acronym for "The Center for Nonviolent Communication".)
There is something deeply clarifying about "The Center". For better
or worse, our network has decided to organize itself under the
auspices of "The Center."
Furthermore, I'm guessing this need for clarity arises from the
intellectual property that CNVC stewards on behalf of our network, so
I'm guessing CNVC desires to PROTECT the INTEGRITY of the NVC process
originally developed by Marshall Rosenberg. To that end, the phrases
"The Center for Nonviolent Communication" and "Nonviolent
Communication" have become registered as protected marks by various
governmental agencies both in the United States and internationally.
Personally, I feel torn about the request. On the one hand, I like
the clarity, and see that the clarity is in support of some other
important needs for me like community, cooperation and mutuality. On
the other hand, I feel sad that the "request to refrain" may actually
unintentionally limit awareness (in the general public) of NVC because
folks who offer "NVC training" who are not yet certified (or even have
no intention of ever becoming certified) who feel inspired to fulfill
CNVC's request may call their "NVC training" something like
"Communication from the Heart". How would anyone in the general
public who sees the flyer know that it is related to NVC? How could
they be led to explore CNVC's website and thus connect to a worldwide
community? So, I'd like the request to be something like "My
experience of Marshall Rosenberg's Nonviolent Communication" as at
least the subtitle of an offering to support others in connection with
our network and the learning and support available there. How is this
for you to hear?
You wrote: I'm guessing you'd prefer I responded from inspiration
want your response to arise from authentic, compassionate giving, that
is, giving from your heart to contribute to fulfilling needs.
You wrote: By the way, I've reflected long on those CNVC requests,
what I wrote above. Would you be willing to say? That would
contribute to my understanding of whether or not you have received the
message I intended to send to you.
> I have an additional concern related to clarity, because the CNVC
> Board has an Evolution Committee in formation.
You wrote: Wow! I didn't know about that committee. Hooray for more
evolution!
> I don't want this
> group to sow confusion or discord in the organization.
You wrote: When I picture the evolution process in Nature, I sure
picture. I see more than 200 certified trainers working in
partnership with CNVC to evolve NVC. I also see hundreds, maybe
thousands of other folks sharing their experience of NVC, each one
shaping and coloring their own representation of the skills and
consciousness of NVC. One of the joys of my experience in this
community since 2000 is the open-hearted acceptance of various flavors
of NVC. For me, there has never been "one, true NVC". This kind of
dogmatic thinking terrifies me.
I enjoy watching NVC evolve in me, and I enjoy hearing others express
their insights and learning. I love that Eva Rambala, one of our
trainers from Hungary, reminded me this weekend of something related
to this. She shared that asking the question, "What is NVC?" can be a
powerful support in connecting to needs and strategies about sharing
NVC with others. I heard her say that there are two important keys to
expressing the answer to the question: 1. The answer begins with,
"For me...." and 2. ends with, "how is this for you?" So I end this
paragraph with curiousity, wondering how is it for you?
You wrote: So I wonder what confusion you're imagining. I wonder if
Imagine this worst case scenario: I'm new to the NVC community and
decide to read the minutes of the recent Board meeting and get
interested in an "Evolution Committee", and then begin looking for
links to that committee. Somehow I find this google group, I might
not realize that this is not part of CNVC. After all, it is titled
"NVC Evolves". Sounds pretty official. I might read some of the
posts here and think that this is a group focusing on creating policy
for CNVC, deciding what is a need, what is NVC, what is CNVC. I might
even feel distressed or disheartened reading the tone expressed in
some of these threads because I lack the skills and consciousness of
NVC and am living out of my own conditioning. I might react with
aversion and decide that NVC is not what I thought it was after all,
just a bunch of people arguing about stuff, leaving with a bad taste
in my mouth.
I recognize that this scenario does not represent the end of the
world, and I like to find strategies that are likely to contribute to
clarity, connection and community, while honoring autonomy and self-
expression.
How does this land with you?
You wrote: Perhaps CNVC's committee is more about conscious steering
the illusion of a false choice based on the deletion of the word "or",
eg choosing between a world where we avoid potential discord OR a
world where we steer into the heart of the issues. I'd like to live
in a world that avoids discord when possible (by empathizing even with
those not present), cleans up any unintentional "mess" with the NVC
skills and consciouness of connection, AND stays open-hearted,
curious, and moving toward enjoying the gold of needs-based human
connection. How do you feel when you consider that?
I want to take advantage of our shared skills and intentions to
connect and Make Life Wonderful, and come out all the richer. How
about
you, Jim? Want to dance with me?
So far, I'm enjoying the dance. I'm concerned that you might
misinterpret a lack of future response from me, so I would like you to
know that I will be engaged in a vigorous training schedule beginning
next Monday and going through the first weeks of May. I may not have
good internet connections for part of this time as I will be traveling
to 5 states. I will check in when I can, though, to see what is
stirring here.
I'm mourning that this discussion may be out of earshot of many
trainers and trainer candidates, because I sense the issues we are
discussing would be important to them as well.
> Would you be
> willing to consider some other name, perhaps "Evolving the
> Consciousness of Connection"?
because that is what motivated me to write it. I look forward to
reading your response and the responses of others.
Warmly,
Jim
On Mar 10, 12:41 pm, "Conal Elliott" <co...@conal.net> wrote:
> This discussion is very dear to me, and I'd like it to be easy for people to
> find later. For that reason, I'd love to see people respond on this newer
> thread rather than on "google or yahoo?". (A request, not a demand.)
>
> Smiles, - Conal
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Eric Mosley <activepeacewo...@gmail.com>
I'm pleased to continue the discussion here, and grateful for the
clarity of splitting the thread.
You wrote: Thanks for raising your concerns.
My response: You're welcome.
> I do have some concerns about the name NVC Evolves. The need not met
> for me in the title of the group relates to connection with CNVC and
> its requests around the use of the initials NVC for non-certified
> trainers.*
and I'm nearly
clueless at this point -- just that it is somehow related to these
CNVC
requests.
My response: So you're feeling perplexed and having difficulty
clueless at this point -- just that it is somehow related to these
CNVC
requests.
connecting with my needs.
You wrote: Do you have more internal clarity you can share with me
about
your needs?
I'm surprised the needs are hard for you to parse out, and I regret
that I was not as clear as I would like to be.
I said in my initial email, "The need not met for me in the title of
the group relates to CONNECTION with CNVC and its requests around the
use of the initials NVC for non-certified trainers.* " The asterisk
referred readers to a quote from CNVC's policies as represented on
CNVC's website.
I'm guessing you're needing clarity on how I'm using the word
"connection" in this respect, is that so?
For me, connection means I'm aware of and responsive to the life
energy moving in myself and others. When I'm meeting my need for
connection, say with the organization called CNVC, I'm focusing my
empathic awareness on the needs of the people representing the
organization. In this case, the Board and leaders of CNVC have chosen
to adopt a policy requesting that the terms "NVC trainer", "NVC" or
"Nonviolent Communication" be used only by certified trainers. The
concern I hear in the request is that others using the terms "might
imply" a "sponsorship" by CNVC of the person or organization using
those terms. Thus a need for CLARITY-what is the relationship between
CNVC and the person offering "NVC training"? There are many layers to
this clarity, including, "Is what this person is offering 'NVC'"? i.e.
the body of work represented by CNVC?"
I'm guessing CNVC would like folks to understand clearly that if they
see the phrases Nonviolent Communication, NVC trainer, etc on a flyer,
website, whatever, that there is a clear connection between the person
producing the flyer, website, training, etc and CNVC.
Does that provide any clarity to you? (It helps me to remember that
CNVC is an acronym for "The Center for Nonviolent Communication".)
There is something deeply clarifying about "The Center". For better
or worse, our network has decided to organize itself under the
auspices of "The Center."
Furthermore, I'm guessing this need for clarity arises from the
intellectual property that CNVC stewards on behalf of our network, so
I'm guessing CNVC desires to PROTECT the INTEGRITY of the NVC process
originally developed by Marshall Rosenberg. To that end, the phrases
"The Center for Nonviolent Communication" and "Nonviolent
Communication" have become registered as protected marks by various
governmental agencies both in the United States and internationally.
Personally, I feel torn about the request. On the one hand, I like
the clarity, and see that the clarity is in support of some other
important needs for me like community, cooperation and mutuality. On
the other hand, I feel sad that the "request to refrain" may actually
unintentionally limit awareness (in the general public) of NVC because
folks who offer "NVC training" who are not yet certified (or even have
no intention of ever becoming certified) who feel inspired to fulfill
CNVC's request may call their "NVC training" something like
"Communication from the Heart". How would anyone in the general
public who sees the flyer know that it is related to NVC? How could
they be led to explore CNVC's website and thus connect to a worldwide
community? So, I'd like the request to be something like "My
experience of Marshall Rosenberg's Nonviolent Communication" as at
least the subtitle of an offering to support others in connection with
our network and the learning and support available there. How is this
for you to hear?
You wrote: I'm guessing you'd prefer I responded from inspiration
rather
than obedience. I know I would! :)
My response: :) Of course! I like the way you say that! I would
than obedience. I know I would! :)
want your response to arise from authentic, compassionate giving, that
is, giving from your heart to contribute to fulfilling needs.
You wrote: By the way, I've reflected long on those CNVC requests,
and I've explored
them with others. I am still looking forward to connecting with the
heart
of the matter. I wonder at this point whether anyone at CNVC has a
clear
need connection with these requests. I'm up for helping find that
basis or,
if already found, to help CNVC communicate it more effectively. (So
"message sent is message received".)
My response: I wonder if anything has shifted in you in response to
them with others. I am still looking forward to connecting with the
heart
of the matter. I wonder at this point whether anyone at CNVC has a
clear
need connection with these requests. I'm up for helping find that
basis or,
if already found, to help CNVC communicate it more effectively. (So
"message sent is message received".)
what I wrote above. Would you be willing to say? That would
contribute to my understanding of whether or not you have received the
message I intended to send to you.
> I have an additional concern related to clarity, because the CNVC
> Board has an Evolution Committee in formation.
evolution!
> I don't want this
> group to sow confusion or discord in the organization.
don't picture a
single organized effort. Quite the opposite. I picture lots and lots
of
creative experiments going on in different directions with loose and
dynamic
connections. A bottom-up process with emergent results. Serving Life
in
unpredictable ways.
So I wonder what confusion you're imagining. I wonder if you think
people
will expect there to be only one group participating in NVC's
evolution and
why you might expect that?
My response: Thanks for the guess. No, I'm in harmony with your
single organized effort. Quite the opposite. I picture lots and lots
of
creative experiments going on in different directions with loose and
dynamic
connections. A bottom-up process with emergent results. Serving Life
in
unpredictable ways.
So I wonder what confusion you're imagining. I wonder if you think
people
will expect there to be only one group participating in NVC's
evolution and
why you might expect that?
picture. I see more than 200 certified trainers working in
partnership with CNVC to evolve NVC. I also see hundreds, maybe
thousands of other folks sharing their experience of NVC, each one
shaping and coloring their own representation of the skills and
consciousness of NVC. One of the joys of my experience in this
community since 2000 is the open-hearted acceptance of various flavors
of NVC. For me, there has never been "one, true NVC". This kind of
dogmatic thinking terrifies me.
I enjoy watching NVC evolve in me, and I enjoy hearing others express
their insights and learning. I love that Eva Rambala, one of our
trainers from Hungary, reminded me this weekend of something related
to this. She shared that asking the question, "What is NVC?" can be a
powerful support in connecting to needs and strategies about sharing
NVC with others. I heard her say that there are two important keys to
expressing the answer to the question: 1. The answer begins with,
"For me...." and 2. ends with, "how is this for you?" So I end this
paragraph with curiousity, wondering how is it for you?
You wrote: So I wonder what confusion you're imagining. I wonder if
you think people
will expect there to be only one group participating in NVC's
evolution and
why you might expect that?
My response: My worry about confusion is simply this.
will expect there to be only one group participating in NVC's
evolution and
why you might expect that?
Imagine this worst case scenario: I'm new to the NVC community and
decide to read the minutes of the recent Board meeting and get
interested in an "Evolution Committee", and then begin looking for
links to that committee. Somehow I find this google group, I might
not realize that this is not part of CNVC. After all, it is titled
"NVC Evolves". Sounds pretty official. I might read some of the
posts here and think that this is a group focusing on creating policy
for CNVC, deciding what is a need, what is NVC, what is CNVC. I might
even feel distressed or disheartened reading the tone expressed in
some of these threads because I lack the skills and consciousness of
NVC and am living out of my own conditioning. I might react with
aversion and decide that NVC is not what I thought it was after all,
just a bunch of people arguing about stuff, leaving with a bad taste
in my mouth.
I recognize that this scenario does not represent the end of the
world, and I like to find strategies that are likely to contribute to
clarity, connection and community, while honoring autonomy and self-
expression.
How does this land with you?
You wrote: Perhaps CNVC's committee is more about conscious steering
(control) than
participating in evolution (emergence). If so, I'm fine what that.
It's a
creative experiment, too! The name "Evolution Committee" might lead
to some
conf
usion, however. I sure get a dissonance in seeing those two words
juxtaposed! :) Perhaps "Steering Committee" might convey the intention
more
successfully, though I'm guessing at the intention for now. Or just
name it
whatever and sort out confusion later.
Rather than avoiding potential discord, I'd prefer to steer into the
real
heart of the issues, where the gold is, and through the heart to all
needs
met fully!
My response: I'd like to live in a world that doesn't leave us with
participating in evolution (emergence). If so, I'm fine what that.
It's a
creative experiment, too! The name "Evolution Committee" might lead
to some
conf
usion, however. I sure get a dissonance in seeing those two words
juxtaposed! :) Perhaps "Steering Committee" might convey the intention
more
successfully, though I'm guessing at the intention for now. Or just
name it
whatever and sort out confusion later.
Rather than avoiding potential discord, I'd prefer to steer into the
real
heart of the issues, where the gold is, and through the heart to all
needs
met fully!
the illusion of a false choice based on the deletion of the word "or",
eg choosing between a world where we avoid potential discord OR a
world where we steer into the heart of the issues. I'd like to live
in a world that avoids discord when possible (by empathizing even with
those not present), cleans up any unintentional "mess" with the NVC
skills and consciouness of connection, AND stays open-hearted,
curious, and moving toward enjoying the gold of needs-based human
connection. How do you feel when you consider that?
I want to take advantage of our shared skills and intentions to
connect and Make Life Wonderful, and come out all the richer. How
about
you, Jim? Want to dance with me?
misinterpret a lack of future response from me, so I would like you to
know that I will be engaged in a vigorous training schedule beginning
next Monday and going through the first weeks of May. I may not have
good internet connections for part of this time as I will be traveling
to 5 states. I will check in when I can, though, to see what is
stirring here.
I'm mourning that this discussion may be out of earshot of many
trainers and trainer candidates, because I sense the issues we are
discussing would be important to them as well.
> Would you be
> willing to consider some other name, perhaps "Evolving the
> Consciousness of Connection"?
Yum. And, I'd like to connect deeply at the needs level before going
to
strategies.
I hope that this posts contributes to your need for deeper connection
to
strategies.
because that is what motivated me to write it. I look forward to
reading your response and the responses of others.
Warmly,
Jim
On Mar 10, 12:41 pm, "Conal Elliott" <co...@conal.net> wrote:
> This discussion is very dear to me, and I'd like it to be easy for people to
> find later. For that reason, I'd love to see people respond on this newer
> thread rather than on "google or yahoo?". (A request, not a demand.)
>
> Smiles, - Conal
>
Emma McCreary
Mar 11, 2008, 6:07:44 PM3/11/08
to NVC Evolves
Jim,
I really am not convinced that confusion would arise. When I learned
NVC, and then found CNVC, I could see a clear distintion between the
"officialness" of CNVC and the "generalness" of the term NVC. I would
not at all have assumed that a google group like this was 'official'
unless it said it was and this group doesn't say it is.
CNVC makes it pretty clear on their website and by their writing of
things like guidelines that they are the "official" ones.
Think about ANOTHER worst case scenario: someone only finds CNVC, and
reads all the guidelines and rules and thinks CNVC is stuck in
authoritarian-paradigm, doesn't realize there are people debating the
issues because all the related groups have "NVC" erased from their
name by the name police, decides NVC is not what they thought it was
after all, just a bunch of people making up "policies" and oppressing
each other with pretty language, and leaves with a bad taste in their
mouth.
When I first read CNVC's site, those rules left a really bad taste in
*my* mouth. I didn't leave NVC because of my yummy experiences reading
Marshall's book and taking workshops, but I did have the thought "oh
darn, they have official-itis here too - they've ossified like every
other structure". I felt sad. I wanted CNVC to provide deep
inspiration, not control. Even now, I hardly every send someone to
CNVC to introduce them to NVC. I sent them to Marshall's book or a
video of him, or an article on another site. I don't want CNVC to be
the first place they see NVC, because I don't want that tired,
bureaucratic, top-down, authority based stuff to be what people see
first. So not juicy!
The first response I had to the guidelines was to submit and feel
resigned and disheartened. I had been excited about teaching NVC until
I read the guidelines and the daunting certification procedure. All
that just to use the word "NVC" - ugh.
It was only later, after finding this group and others thinking about
that idea that it actually was just a request, not a demand, that all
the anger and frustration came up and I realized I had submitted
because of the authority communicated by CNVC's site, and how deeply
that did not match my hope for what NVC can be, ie a tool to change
those kinds of authority structures. Not to mention the absurd
inefficiency (in my eyes) of not being able to use the exact word for
what you are discussing or teaching.
And realizing there were people who also didn't jive with the rules
really met my needs for hope and inspiration that we can change that
aspect of CNVC. That CNVC doesn't have to be the big bad daddy of NVC,
policing the rest of us to stay in line with it's agenda. I know I'm
being blunt and jackally here. But I want to give feedback on how this
debate affects people who maybe aren't perfectly NVC with giraffe ears
on, b/c you were mentioning a worst case scenario about that.
I'm feeling angry, sigh. This brings up a lot of fear in me, wanting
to protect the autonomy of this group, of people who disagree with
authority. Not wanting to live in a world that is ruled by authority,
by proper ways to do things, by authority that wants to control how I
express myself.
I'm surprised that CNVC isn't more aware of how they are living out
and recreating a domination paradigm through their organization. That
the way they have worded the "requests" are going to be received as
demands because of the authority they have claimed, because of the way
we are all trained in authority from day one.
And then to bring out the copyright and legal trademark stuff. That's
using a completely domination-based legal structure to defend the
authoritarian-based policy about something that is meant to be
fundamentally anti-authoritarian. It feels icky to me.
I want to connect to the needs under the request, but I am just not
getting there. Right now I'm just in reaction to the domination flavor
of it. I hope this serves as feedback/information for you at the very
least. Maybe Conal will have a more clear-headed perspective.
Anyway, thanks for dancing and I look forward to untangling all this
and getting to connection. =)
Emma
I really am not convinced that confusion would arise. When I learned
NVC, and then found CNVC, I could see a clear distintion between the
"officialness" of CNVC and the "generalness" of the term NVC. I would
not at all have assumed that a google group like this was 'official'
unless it said it was and this group doesn't say it is.
CNVC makes it pretty clear on their website and by their writing of
things like guidelines that they are the "official" ones.
Think about ANOTHER worst case scenario: someone only finds CNVC, and
reads all the guidelines and rules and thinks CNVC is stuck in
authoritarian-paradigm, doesn't realize there are people debating the
issues because all the related groups have "NVC" erased from their
name by the name police, decides NVC is not what they thought it was
after all, just a bunch of people making up "policies" and oppressing
each other with pretty language, and leaves with a bad taste in their
mouth.
When I first read CNVC's site, those rules left a really bad taste in
*my* mouth. I didn't leave NVC because of my yummy experiences reading
Marshall's book and taking workshops, but I did have the thought "oh
darn, they have official-itis here too - they've ossified like every
other structure". I felt sad. I wanted CNVC to provide deep
inspiration, not control. Even now, I hardly every send someone to
CNVC to introduce them to NVC. I sent them to Marshall's book or a
video of him, or an article on another site. I don't want CNVC to be
the first place they see NVC, because I don't want that tired,
bureaucratic, top-down, authority based stuff to be what people see
first. So not juicy!
The first response I had to the guidelines was to submit and feel
resigned and disheartened. I had been excited about teaching NVC until
I read the guidelines and the daunting certification procedure. All
that just to use the word "NVC" - ugh.
It was only later, after finding this group and others thinking about
that idea that it actually was just a request, not a demand, that all
the anger and frustration came up and I realized I had submitted
because of the authority communicated by CNVC's site, and how deeply
that did not match my hope for what NVC can be, ie a tool to change
those kinds of authority structures. Not to mention the absurd
inefficiency (in my eyes) of not being able to use the exact word for
what you are discussing or teaching.
And realizing there were people who also didn't jive with the rules
really met my needs for hope and inspiration that we can change that
aspect of CNVC. That CNVC doesn't have to be the big bad daddy of NVC,
policing the rest of us to stay in line with it's agenda. I know I'm
being blunt and jackally here. But I want to give feedback on how this
debate affects people who maybe aren't perfectly NVC with giraffe ears
on, b/c you were mentioning a worst case scenario about that.
I'm feeling angry, sigh. This brings up a lot of fear in me, wanting
to protect the autonomy of this group, of people who disagree with
authority. Not wanting to live in a world that is ruled by authority,
by proper ways to do things, by authority that wants to control how I
express myself.
I'm surprised that CNVC isn't more aware of how they are living out
and recreating a domination paradigm through their organization. That
the way they have worded the "requests" are going to be received as
demands because of the authority they have claimed, because of the way
we are all trained in authority from day one.
And then to bring out the copyright and legal trademark stuff. That's
using a completely domination-based legal structure to defend the
authoritarian-based policy about something that is meant to be
fundamentally anti-authoritarian. It feels icky to me.
I want to connect to the needs under the request, but I am just not
getting there. Right now I'm just in reaction to the domination flavor
of it. I hope this serves as feedback/information for you at the very
least. Maybe Conal will have a more clear-headed perspective.
Anyway, thanks for dancing and I look forward to untangling all this
and getting to connection. =)
Emma
Conal Elliott
Mar 11, 2008, 6:58:55 PM3/11/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hi Jim,
I'm glad for the chance for both of us learn & connect. I'll reply to your note when I'm ready. For now, the same reactions of discouragement I've had when reading the CNVC site and talking with other CNVC-involved folks, and my jackals are howling. Reading Emma's response, which voices some of my own reaction, as well as hearing Holly's reminders of what I care about, helps me to relax into taking my time.
Just FYI, another challenge for me in dialoging with you (besides the content) is that I get on edge the very moment I see your member name (and email address). I have a lot pain connected with how cnvc-involved folks use the term "trainer". (If you'd like to know more, see http://evolve.awakeningcompassion.com/posts/some-comments-on-the-word-trainer/.) Then I start out wanting to educate/snipe-at/diagnose you, but not open my heart.
Breathing, - Conal
I'm glad for the chance for both of us learn & connect. I'll reply to your note when I'm ready. For now, the same reactions of discouragement I've had when reading the CNVC site and talking with other CNVC-involved folks, and my jackals are howling. Reading Emma's response, which voices some of my own reaction, as well as hearing Holly's reminders of what I care about, helps me to relax into taking my time.
Just FYI, another challenge for me in dialoging with you (besides the content) is that I get on edge the very moment I see your member name (and email address). I have a lot pain connected with how cnvc-involved folks use the term "trainer". (If you'd like to know more, see http://evolve.awakeningcompassion.com/posts/some-comments-on-the-word-trainer/.) Then I start out wanting to educate/snipe-at/diagnose you, but not open my heart.
Breathing, - Conal
Holly Croydon
Mar 11, 2008, 11:52:53 PM3/11/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hello Jim,
Like Emma, several of your responses to Conal here trigger me deeply, and my judgments about you and CNVC in general leave me discouraged and sad. And mad is in there, too, mm-hmm. So far, I don't know how to untangle CNVC's strategies from the established cultural models emphasizing "preserve and protect" over "evolve and flow," as I might describe what I'd like better. I don't know how to hear "this term is a legally protected service mark of CNVC" other than a threat of punishment in the case of non-compliance. I have not been able to equate a certification program with anything other than a stamp of approval from external authority. And I don't know how to align these things with what I love best about the consciousness of NVC itself.
This is a very important question to me---how do we effectively shift away from the domineering/controlling that is currently foundational on our planet, while working within those domination-based structures (our legal systems, governments, heirarchical organizations, corporations, etc.)? And can we? Is there completely new way we haven't thought of yet that would be more effective?
As Daniel Quinn, one of my favorite authors, writes in his book "The Story of B":
I would guess these are questions that CNVC leadership grapples with. My impression of CNVC is that it is made up of people who care very deeply about NVC, compassion, and peace, and are passionate about social change. However, in attempting to organize an official, sanctioned effort to "protect the integrity" of NVC, I wonder if it is possible to stay connected with Life? Divine Life, which I see in its natural, evolutional state as chaotic, ever-changing and full of mistakes and do-overs---the opposite of preserve and protect?
My first reaction when I saw that you had joined this group, Jim, honestly, was an unpleasant mix of anger and fear. I was fearful because I was telling myself a story about your intentions, and it was not a kind story. Where I'd like to be is completely okay with whatever your reasons might be. I'm workin' on that. I fully own that I am riddled with judgments here. ::smiles and rolls eyes at herself:: I'm happy to call myself on them and want sincerely to let them go.
When I can get my should-monkies and fear-gremlins to shut up for a second, and connect with my deepest heart, I can recognize your participation in this group as a precious, precious gift. Here is a chance to connect with another passionate heart, one who is active and integral within the CNVC organization and the wider NVC community. I am guessing that exploring with you, as well as Conal (who is my partner and sweetie, btw) and Emma and others could help me to greater understanding and connection, and to work with those pesky judgments o' mine.
I'm glad to have the information that you will be traveling for an extended period. I probably would have read all kinds of inaccurate things into your sudden absence. Thanks for that, too, Jim, and I wish you safe journeys and joyful adventures.
When and if you are able and inspired, I'd welcome and be grateful to hear what comes up in you when you read this.
Namaste,
Holly Croydon
Like Emma, several of your responses to Conal here trigger me deeply, and my judgments about you and CNVC in general leave me discouraged and sad. And mad is in there, too, mm-hmm. So far, I don't know how to untangle CNVC's strategies from the established cultural models emphasizing "preserve and protect" over "evolve and flow," as I might describe what I'd like better. I don't know how to hear "this term is a legally protected service mark of CNVC" other than a threat of punishment in the case of non-compliance. I have not been able to equate a certification program with anything other than a stamp of approval from external authority. And I don't know how to align these things with what I love best about the consciousness of NVC itself.
This is a very important question to me---how do we effectively shift away from the domineering/controlling that is currently foundational on our planet, while working within those domination-based structures (our legal systems, governments, heirarchical organizations, corporations, etc.)? And can we? Is there completely new way we haven't thought of yet that would be more effective?
As Daniel Quinn, one of my favorite authors, writes in his book "The Story of B":
If the world is saved, it will not be by old minds with new programs but by new minds with no programs at all.
My first reaction when I saw that you had joined this group, Jim, honestly, was an unpleasant mix of anger and fear. I was fearful because I was telling myself a story about your intentions, and it was not a kind story. Where I'd like to be is completely okay with whatever your reasons might be. I'm workin' on that. I fully own that I am riddled with judgments here. ::smiles and rolls eyes at herself:: I'm happy to call myself on them and want sincerely to let them go.
When I can get my should-monkies and fear-gremlins to shut up for a second, and connect with my deepest heart, I can recognize your participation in this group as a precious, precious gift. Here is a chance to connect with another passionate heart, one who is active and integral within the CNVC organization and the wider NVC community. I am guessing that exploring with you, as well as Conal (who is my partner and sweetie, btw) and Emma and others could help me to greater understanding and connection, and to work with those pesky judgments o' mine.
I'm glad to have the information that you will be traveling for an extended period. I probably would have read all kinds of inaccurate things into your sudden absence. Thanks for that, too, Jim, and I wish you safe journeys and joyful adventures.
When and if you are able and inspired, I'd welcome and be grateful to hear what comes up in you when you read this.
Namaste,
Holly Croydon
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:15 PM, nvctrainer <nvctr...@gmail.com> wrote:
Holly Croydon
Mar 12, 2008, 12:29:02 AM3/12/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Emma! omg I *heart* you so much right now. I appreciate and celebrate the honesty and passion I hear in your response. Wowie.
I, for one, have a heckuva time connecting with what is really alive in others when they cloak their hooting jackals in layers of nvc-speak. For me, it is far easier to connect with the life-serving core of what is alive in a person when they share with me honestly and vulnerably what's really going on in there, especially if it is emotions or stuff going on that we tend to label as bad or unpleasant. So thank you, m'dear, for giving me/us the real stuff.
Not that I am interested in hearing someone spout at me in an unconscious way---I don't read your note that way at all.
Although I had many of the same reactions you described, I was too scared to say what you did. I would have gotten over my timidity attack and eventually responded in some way, but I like how you said things better than what I would have come up with anyway.
This exchange is nurturing new excitement in me for openness and collaboration in total honesty. I don't want to prevent conflict, necessarily. I don't think that is something that us hoomuns* can quite do. At least at this evolutionary stage. I'm worried that struggling to prevent conflict sometimes leaves us attempting to put a lid on the unpredictable flow and wild chaos of life, thus deadening it. I do want to welcome and work with what is truly alive in each of us, even if it isn't pretty, to go on a treasure hunt to discover the gold of our shared humanity and inspire joyful mutual giving.
Emma, your note inspires *me* to stay in touch with the real stuff and reach out with it, as consciously as I possibly can.
All, what's going on in you right now? Inspired to share?
Hugs-not-mugs,
Holly
* In addition to Emma, I also *heart* silly things: http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/11/26/i-had-a-hoomun-but-i-eated-it/
I, for one, have a heckuva time connecting with what is really alive in others when they cloak their hooting jackals in layers of nvc-speak. For me, it is far easier to connect with the life-serving core of what is alive in a person when they share with me honestly and vulnerably what's really going on in there, especially if it is emotions or stuff going on that we tend to label as bad or unpleasant. So thank you, m'dear, for giving me/us the real stuff.
Not that I am interested in hearing someone spout at me in an unconscious way---I don't read your note that way at all.
Although I had many of the same reactions you described, I was too scared to say what you did. I would have gotten over my timidity attack and eventually responded in some way, but I like how you said things better than what I would have come up with anyway.
This exchange is nurturing new excitement in me for openness and collaboration in total honesty. I don't want to prevent conflict, necessarily. I don't think that is something that us hoomuns* can quite do. At least at this evolutionary stage. I'm worried that struggling to prevent conflict sometimes leaves us attempting to put a lid on the unpredictable flow and wild chaos of life, thus deadening it. I do want to welcome and work with what is truly alive in each of us, even if it isn't pretty, to go on a treasure hunt to discover the gold of our shared humanity and inspire joyful mutual giving.
Emma, your note inspires *me* to stay in touch with the real stuff and reach out with it, as consciously as I possibly can.
All, what's going on in you right now? Inspired to share?
Hugs-not-mugs,
Holly
* In addition to Emma, I also *heart* silly things: http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/11/26/i-had-a-hoomun-but-i-eated-it/
Emma McCreary
Mar 12, 2008, 4:26:56 AM3/12/08
to NVC Evolves
Holly and Conal,
I'm deeply energized and happy to read your responses! I feel a deep
community and inspiration need met to be able to dialogue about the
heart of NVC, aliveness and authenticity and showing up as we truly
are. Oh, I'm feeling a lot of love right now!
I feel this new freedom and joy about being honest, a commitment to
jumping in with "what is", and I feel deeply happy getting feedback
that it served life here to do that. It affirms my actions more deeply
served life than trying to wait and make it perfectly "formal" NVC, or
hold back and be "nice", etc, etc.
Holly, I love what you wrote here about the wild flow and
unpredictable unfolding etc, and connecting with what is truly alive
even if it's not "pretty". I agree, and that is this precious thing
for me about NVC, the focus on aliveness.
I also like the distinction around being conscious with it. If we can
be conscious about our "unpretty" stuff, we can dialog about it in a
non-violent way. Instead of trying to sanitize it or hide it or cloak
it in pretty language. I want to own it and speak it as clearly as I
can, without negating or hiding it. That feels strong and real and
alivening to me!
I too wonder if it is really possible for CNVC to stay connected with
Life if it's going for 'preserve and protect' rather than supporting
the flow of life. I don't know the answer.
My excitement is in finding new bottom-up approaches, which will
involve a lot of experimentation and learning new ways of being, and
rapid transformation of systems and having a lot less control than
CNVC seems to want to have right now.
I find myself very curious about how CNVC came to be so interested in
control and "protecting the integrity of NVC" and certification and
whatnot. When and where did that arise? Was it Marshall's idea? What
does he have to say about all this? I am just wondering, because he
seems to be pretty anti-authoritarian in his ideas. I would be wildly
delighted for him to weigh in on this topic.
When I connect with what's alive in me under the fear and anger, it's
a passionate excitement about spreading NVC consciousness. And this
awareness that bottom up-approaches can spread like wildfire in this
day and age and top-down approaches are the dinosaurs of the world. I
want NVC to be accessible, to spread, to be everywhere. I want this
consciousness to be shared, to be experimented with and talked about
and yes, it will be learned and taught in a non-perfect, evolving,
messy way if you let go of control, but it will be taught and
discussed MORE and that is GOOD. Controlling it is limiting its growth
and evolution. It wants to fly, give it wings!
Another passionate excitement I have is that CNVC could really be an
experimental *organization*, doing things in new and exciting ways,
embracing new bottom-up approaches, providing leadership and
inspiration in this field. There's so much possibility there. CNVC
could really be radical and new and interesting and cool and hip,
something that young people talk about, not just old hippies. OK,
stereotype, but I'm young and hip and want to see this beautiful
teaching be accessible in new ways, I want it to be out there and
evolving and changing and growing with the times. Using Web 2.0
models, collaboration, connection, etc. Talk about copyright - let's
check out Creative Commons, Open Source licenses, etc. Let's shake
things up. Let's reconnect NVC to other evolving radical ways of
connecting and encouraging co-creativity. I see new structures and
technologies emerging all over the place that are meeting needs in
truly new and exciting ways and would love to see CNVC using them.
I'd love to see CNVC release the whole attachment to "quality
control", or control period, and refocus on being a deeply
inspirational leader of NVC conscousness. Why have a Committee on
Evolution - why not *BE THE EVOLUTION*. What if CNVC was dedicated to
evolving and being the leading edge of NVC? That's what *I'd* love to
see. Or, if you don't want to do that, then at least deeply support
the people who do want to explore the edges!
And I want to thank you Jim as well for letting us know about your
absence cause I prolly would have been making stuff up too. =)
Yay! I'm truly excited about where this conversation could go.
Your happiness advocate and hopeful revolutionary,
Emma
I'm deeply energized and happy to read your responses! I feel a deep
community and inspiration need met to be able to dialogue about the
heart of NVC, aliveness and authenticity and showing up as we truly
are. Oh, I'm feeling a lot of love right now!
I feel this new freedom and joy about being honest, a commitment to
jumping in with "what is", and I feel deeply happy getting feedback
that it served life here to do that. It affirms my actions more deeply
served life than trying to wait and make it perfectly "formal" NVC, or
hold back and be "nice", etc, etc.
Holly, I love what you wrote here about the wild flow and
unpredictable unfolding etc, and connecting with what is truly alive
even if it's not "pretty". I agree, and that is this precious thing
for me about NVC, the focus on aliveness.
I also like the distinction around being conscious with it. If we can
be conscious about our "unpretty" stuff, we can dialog about it in a
non-violent way. Instead of trying to sanitize it or hide it or cloak
it in pretty language. I want to own it and speak it as clearly as I
can, without negating or hiding it. That feels strong and real and
alivening to me!
I too wonder if it is really possible for CNVC to stay connected with
Life if it's going for 'preserve and protect' rather than supporting
the flow of life. I don't know the answer.
My excitement is in finding new bottom-up approaches, which will
involve a lot of experimentation and learning new ways of being, and
rapid transformation of systems and having a lot less control than
CNVC seems to want to have right now.
I find myself very curious about how CNVC came to be so interested in
control and "protecting the integrity of NVC" and certification and
whatnot. When and where did that arise? Was it Marshall's idea? What
does he have to say about all this? I am just wondering, because he
seems to be pretty anti-authoritarian in his ideas. I would be wildly
delighted for him to weigh in on this topic.
When I connect with what's alive in me under the fear and anger, it's
a passionate excitement about spreading NVC consciousness. And this
awareness that bottom up-approaches can spread like wildfire in this
day and age and top-down approaches are the dinosaurs of the world. I
want NVC to be accessible, to spread, to be everywhere. I want this
consciousness to be shared, to be experimented with and talked about
and yes, it will be learned and taught in a non-perfect, evolving,
messy way if you let go of control, but it will be taught and
discussed MORE and that is GOOD. Controlling it is limiting its growth
and evolution. It wants to fly, give it wings!
Another passionate excitement I have is that CNVC could really be an
experimental *organization*, doing things in new and exciting ways,
embracing new bottom-up approaches, providing leadership and
inspiration in this field. There's so much possibility there. CNVC
could really be radical and new and interesting and cool and hip,
something that young people talk about, not just old hippies. OK,
stereotype, but I'm young and hip and want to see this beautiful
teaching be accessible in new ways, I want it to be out there and
evolving and changing and growing with the times. Using Web 2.0
models, collaboration, connection, etc. Talk about copyright - let's
check out Creative Commons, Open Source licenses, etc. Let's shake
things up. Let's reconnect NVC to other evolving radical ways of
connecting and encouraging co-creativity. I see new structures and
technologies emerging all over the place that are meeting needs in
truly new and exciting ways and would love to see CNVC using them.
I'd love to see CNVC release the whole attachment to "quality
control", or control period, and refocus on being a deeply
inspirational leader of NVC conscousness. Why have a Committee on
Evolution - why not *BE THE EVOLUTION*. What if CNVC was dedicated to
evolving and being the leading edge of NVC? That's what *I'd* love to
see. Or, if you don't want to do that, then at least deeply support
the people who do want to explore the edges!
And I want to thank you Jim as well for letting us know about your
absence cause I prolly would have been making stuff up too. =)
Yay! I'm truly excited about where this conversation could go.
Your happiness advocate and hopeful revolutionary,
Emma
Conal Elliott
Mar 12, 2008, 7:16:13 PM3/12/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hi Emma,
I enjoy and share your curiosity & questions about how CNVC got into the "preserve and protect" mode with (centralized, external) certification, and particularly around why Marshall would go along. Were there battles, and did Marshall cave in? I've picked up bits of history here and there that I don't know how to reconcile into a consistent picture.
I also wonder whether CNVC can let go of control. As Jim Manske ("nvctrainer") mentioned, the "C" in "CNVC" stands for "center". Life, I undestand it, is a bottom-up, decentralized, emergent process. I also love the dream that CNVC might move forward in as radical a way as you suggest. I'm happy to offer them some fresh perspective and energy in shifting in that direction, and I imagine you are also. Part of that work may be discovering clarity around needs behind the current centralized strategies, more deeply than is recorded on CNVC's site.
In the process, I want to make sure I stay detached from the idea that the evolution of NVC requires CNVC. Perhaps CNVC has a complementary role to play -- to present a mixture of some NVC Consciousness and some structures familiar to a domination culture, providing a widely-reachable goal and resting place on a more far-reaching journey.
I'm in glee reading your vision for a hip, experimental NVC organization, whether that organization is called CNVC or not. Yes, let's shake things up.
Love, Conal
I enjoy and share your curiosity & questions about how CNVC got into the "preserve and protect" mode with (centralized, external) certification, and particularly around why Marshall would go along. Were there battles, and did Marshall cave in? I've picked up bits of history here and there that I don't know how to reconcile into a consistent picture.
I also wonder whether CNVC can let go of control. As Jim Manske ("nvctrainer") mentioned, the "C" in "CNVC" stands for "center". Life, I undestand it, is a bottom-up, decentralized, emergent process. I also love the dream that CNVC might move forward in as radical a way as you suggest. I'm happy to offer them some fresh perspective and energy in shifting in that direction, and I imagine you are also. Part of that work may be discovering clarity around needs behind the current centralized strategies, more deeply than is recorded on CNVC's site.
In the process, I want to make sure I stay detached from the idea that the evolution of NVC requires CNVC. Perhaps CNVC has a complementary role to play -- to present a mixture of some NVC Consciousness and some structures familiar to a domination culture, providing a widely-reachable goal and resting place on a more far-reaching journey.
I'm in glee reading your vision for a hip, experimental NVC organization, whether that organization is called CNVC or not. Yes, let's shake things up.
Love, Conal
Conal Elliott
Mar 14, 2008, 1:23:11 AM3/14/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hi Jim,
I hope you're having a great time in IITs. To simplify & focus the conversation, I'm replying to a piece of your note. I'll reply to more later.
> I said in my initial email, "The need not met for me in the title of
> the group relates to CONNECTION with CNVC and its requests around
> the use of the initials NVC for non-certified trainers.* " The
> asterisk referred readers to a quote from CNVC's policies as
> represented on CNVC's website.
Ah, I had misparsed. I thought you said that the need is "in connection with", but now I see you mean connection as a need. So I'm slightly less puzzled.
And yes, I caught the asterisk bit, and I've been aware of those statements. I've been skeptical from my first reading about whether they're really meant as "requests" (as they're stated). Given the mentions of registered trademarks and government agents, which I don't know how to interpret other than rights/should and/or threat, I tend to guess they're demands.
> I'm guessing you're needing clarity on how I'm using the word
> "connection" in this respect, is that so?
No. I'd simply misparsed the sentence grammar.
> For me, connection means I'm aware of and responsive to the life
> energy moving in myself and others. When I'm meeting my need for
> connection, say with the organization called CNVC, I'm focusing my
> empathic awareness on the needs of the people representing the
> organization. In this case, the Board and leaders of CNVC have
> chosen to adopt a policy requesting that the terms "NVC trainer",
> "NVC" or "Nonviolent Communication" be used only by certified
> trainers. The concern I hear in the request is that others using
> the terms "might imply" a "sponsorship" by CNVC of the person or
> organization using those terms. Thus a need for CLARITY-what is the
> relationship between CNVC and the person offering "NVC training"?
> There are many layers to this clarity, including, "Is what this
> person is offering 'NVC'"? i.e. "the body of work represented by
> CNVC?"
I *love* clarity and contributing to clarity.
If I understand the belief behinds CNVC's policies, it's that people are likely to assume by default that CNVC endorses me, simply because they know I'm teaching NVC (e.g., from the title of my workshop). If I held that belief, then I'd want to take steps to point out that it isn't so.
A general policy of avoiding "terms that might imply ..", which I'd clarify as "terms that people might interpret as ...", doesn't work for me, as I doubt it would for you. After all, people make all kinds of interpretations when they mix their own biases with what they hear. So I want to make my best call on how people are *likely* to interpret what I say. And I don't believe people who aren't already immersed in CNVC's perspective are likely to assume anything at all about CNVC endorsement.
Ever since I read CNVC's requests/policies and reasons, I've been puzzling over the considerable gap between their perspective and mine. I'll offer this guess about the gap's source. The folks shaping these policies have an uncommon focus that they share in common: namely on CNVC. Such a focus could easily skew their guesses and assumptions about what other people would assume (people interested in NVC). The result of the "uncommon common focus" (within CNVC) could be policies that make perfect sense to the policy-makers but not to others. And given that the policies are presented with needs words *and* because people are used to going along with authority, I imagine that a lot of people don't notice that the assumptions are present & questionable, even if many of them do notice their own personal irritation, disappointment, and loss of enthusiasm.
I'd love to know how you understand what I'm saying here and how feel with that understanding.
> Does that provide any clarity to you? (It helps me to remember that
> CNVC is an acronym for "The Center for Nonviolent Communication".)
> There is something deeply clarifying about "The Center". For better
> or worse, our network has decided to organize itself under the
> auspices of "The Center."
I'm sure curious about the history of CNVC. I wonder what kind of concerns were explored before creating a Center, particularly Marshall's concerns. I wonder what concerns were raised around certification and centralized authority. I wonder about members of "our network" who really did make that decision, as about those who went along for some kind of reward, and those who left, to "preserve the integrity" of their own NVC process.
Warmly, - Conal
I hope you're having a great time in IITs. To simplify & focus the conversation, I'm replying to a piece of your note. I'll reply to more later.
> I said in my initial email, "The need not met for me in the title of
> the group relates to CONNECTION with CNVC and its requests around
> the use of the initials NVC for non-certified trainers.* " The
> asterisk referred readers to a quote from CNVC's policies as
> represented on CNVC's website.
And yes, I caught the asterisk bit, and I've been aware of those statements. I've been skeptical from my first reading about whether they're really meant as "requests" (as they're stated). Given the mentions of registered trademarks and government agents, which I don't know how to interpret other than rights/should and/or threat, I tend to guess they're demands.
> I'm guessing you're needing clarity on how I'm using the word
> "connection" in this respect, is that so?
> For me, connection means I'm aware of and responsive to the life
> energy moving in myself and others. When I'm meeting my need for
> connection, say with the organization called CNVC, I'm focusing my
> empathic awareness on the needs of the people representing the
> organization. In this case, the Board and leaders of CNVC have
> chosen to adopt a policy requesting that the terms "NVC trainer",
> "NVC" or "Nonviolent Communication" be used only by certified
> trainers. The concern I hear in the request is that others using
> the terms "might imply" a "sponsorship" by CNVC of the person or
> organization using those terms. Thus a need for CLARITY-what is the
> relationship between CNVC and the person offering "NVC training"?
> There are many layers to this clarity, including, "Is what this
> person is offering 'NVC'"? i.e. "the body of work represented by
> CNVC?"
If I understand the belief behinds CNVC's policies, it's that people are likely to assume by default that CNVC endorses me, simply because they know I'm teaching NVC (e.g., from the title of my workshop). If I held that belief, then I'd want to take steps to point out that it isn't so.
A general policy of avoiding "terms that might imply ..", which I'd clarify as "terms that people might interpret as ...", doesn't work for me, as I doubt it would for you. After all, people make all kinds of interpretations when they mix their own biases with what they hear. So I want to make my best call on how people are *likely* to interpret what I say. And I don't believe people who aren't already immersed in CNVC's perspective are likely to assume anything at all about CNVC endorsement.
Ever since I read CNVC's requests/policies and reasons, I've been puzzling over the considerable gap between their perspective and mine. I'll offer this guess about the gap's source. The folks shaping these policies have an uncommon focus that they share in common: namely on CNVC. Such a focus could easily skew their guesses and assumptions about what other people would assume (people interested in NVC). The result of the "uncommon common focus" (within CNVC) could be policies that make perfect sense to the policy-makers but not to others. And given that the policies are presented with needs words *and* because people are used to going along with authority, I imagine that a lot of people don't notice that the assumptions are present & questionable, even if many of them do notice their own personal irritation, disappointment, and loss of enthusiasm.
I'd love to know how you understand what I'm saying here and how feel with that understanding.
> Does that provide any clarity to you? (It helps me to remember that
> CNVC is an acronym for "The Center for Nonviolent Communication".)
> There is something deeply clarifying about "The Center". For better
> or worse, our network has decided to organize itself under the
> auspices of "The Center."
Warmly, - Conal
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:15 PM, nvctrainer <nvctr...@gmail.com> wrote:
Eric Mosley
Mar 15, 2008, 10:25:50 PM3/15/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Conal and all;
I wonder if changing the name to something that implies a discussion
about if and how NVC might be evolving would satisfy all concerned.
Perhaps calling it, "Is NVC Evolving?". I think (not a lawyer) that
might satisfy the potential legal concerns about using the name NVC?
Sort of like having a discussion group about some name brand product,
like, "Is Ford Making Better Cars?" Or maybe just call it, "NVC
Evolves, The Uncertified, Unauthorized, and Possibly Illegal
Discussion Group". :)
Have a great weekend,
Eric
I wonder if changing the name to something that implies a discussion
about if and how NVC might be evolving would satisfy all concerned.
Perhaps calling it, "Is NVC Evolving?". I think (not a lawyer) that
might satisfy the potential legal concerns about using the name NVC?
Sort of like having a discussion group about some name brand product,
like, "Is Ford Making Better Cars?" Or maybe just call it, "NVC
Evolves, The Uncertified, Unauthorized, and Possibly Illegal
Discussion Group". :)
Have a great weekend,
Eric
Conal Elliott
Mar 16, 2008, 2:51:10 AM3/16/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hi Eric,
NVC has been evolving for most of Marshall's life. Longer, considering his influences. Conversations, blogs, e-groups, etc continue the evolution. I have a hard time understanding how NVC can help but be evolving.
The question of whether NVC is evolving me doesn't really grab me. What does is participating in it evolution, which is what I'm doing.
I'm not having legal concerns about using the name "NVC". Is anyone else?
By using the name NVC in various ways despite cnvc's "requests", I'm inviting cnvc to a giraffe dance. In a dance they might connect to and express their needs more deeply, honestly and clearly and get freed up from attachment to their current strategies. Together we may learn to live more consistently and deeply from the Sacred Place, releasing habits of control and trusting life.
I have some related remarks at http://evolve.awakeningcompassion.com/posts/using-the-name-nonviolent-communication-or-nvc/ .
Your second suggestion (non-serious, I believe), doesn't fit my understanding either. The group *is* certified and authorized. Not by cnvc, but then cnvc isn't certified etc by the group either. And the group is "official", in that it exists. I don't know of a more impressive authority than Reality.
These notions of "certified", "authorized", "official" etc remind me of something from children's social behavior. One kid would decide that he or she is the leader and impress that reality on the other kids. The Power Over game only works because there are plenty of people ready to take up the Power Under role. Without the latter, the former doesn't work.
Cheers, - Conal
NVC has been evolving for most of Marshall's life. Longer, considering his influences. Conversations, blogs, e-groups, etc continue the evolution. I have a hard time understanding how NVC can help but be evolving.
The question of whether NVC is evolving me doesn't really grab me. What does is participating in it evolution, which is what I'm doing.
I'm not having legal concerns about using the name "NVC". Is anyone else?
By using the name NVC in various ways despite cnvc's "requests", I'm inviting cnvc to a giraffe dance. In a dance they might connect to and express their needs more deeply, honestly and clearly and get freed up from attachment to their current strategies. Together we may learn to live more consistently and deeply from the Sacred Place, releasing habits of control and trusting life.
I have some related remarks at http://evolve.awakeningcompassion.com/posts/using-the-name-nonviolent-communication-or-nvc/ .
Your second suggestion (non-serious, I believe), doesn't fit my understanding either. The group *is* certified and authorized. Not by cnvc, but then cnvc isn't certified etc by the group either. And the group is "official", in that it exists. I don't know of a more impressive authority than Reality.
These notions of "certified", "authorized", "official" etc remind me of something from children's social behavior. One kid would decide that he or she is the leader and impress that reality on the other kids. The Power Over game only works because there are plenty of people ready to take up the Power Under role. Without the latter, the former doesn't work.
Cheers, - Conal
Eric Mosley
Mar 16, 2008, 1:34:35 PM3/16/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hi Conal;
I think I am hearing you say that you are really enjoying the discussion with Jim as a representative of CNVC? and that you are strongly wanting to contribute to CNVC being a group that embodies strategies that support everyones experiences and needs?
Anyway, my post was meant to be humorous. The legal part was in reference to Jim's comment about having government protection for registered names, and intended to be a humorous response.
take care,
Eric
Conal Elliott
Mar 16, 2008, 2:27:05 PM3/16/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hi Eric,
Thanks for the reflection. Yes to your guesses, and deeper still, beyond whatever strategies cnvc embodies, I'd love for to have one or more organizations that visibly model really living from NVC Consciousness deeply and consistently, not settling for masking control habits behind nvc-like language. I don't know whether cnvc can be one of those organizations. My hunch is that they want to and don't know how. Add transparency, and we could have a really great starting point.
Thanks also for the humor. Please do keep it up!
Smiles, - Conal
Thanks for the reflection. Yes to your guesses, and deeper still, beyond whatever strategies cnvc embodies, I'd love for to have one or more organizations that visibly model really living from NVC Consciousness deeply and consistently, not settling for masking control habits behind nvc-like language. I don't know whether cnvc can be one of those organizations. My hunch is that they want to and don't know how. Add transparency, and we could have a really great starting point.
Thanks also for the humor. Please do keep it up!
Smiles, - Conal
Eric Mosley
Mar 16, 2008, 7:01:31 PM3/16/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hi Conal;
You're welcome, and thank you for your reply, I feel more connected with you and your dreams. I share your hope for organizations that value everyones needs as equally important in actions as well as word, and agree with your hunch about CNVC as well.
I wonder if it is possible for the kinds of organizational structures that have come out of domination strategies to work in partnership strategies? And then I think, organizations are simply groups of people, so if the people who make up an organization have a partnership paradigm, then the organization would too. So then I wonder if the problems with CNVC not living in accord with the principles of NVC result from the people that make up CNVC not being in harmony with the principles, or are the problems inherent in that type of organizational structure? Perhaps in part both? Or maybe neither. :) I really don't know, and imagine it will take time to sort out how that will work out.
For me personally, I'm simply trying to live the way I want the world to be, to be the change as Gandhi said.
with warm regards,
Eric
Emma McCreary
Mar 16, 2008, 7:43:43 PM3/16/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
I’ve wondered this too – how could people steeped in NVC not see the obvious domination structure of CNVC?
I generally chock it up to simple lack of awareness. As in perhaps they never realized they were adopting domination organizational structures, they just set up the organization like all the other organizations they had seen or been part of. And then they started adopting the mindsets of domination structures without realizing it. So my theory is that domination culture has such a mindset of conformity that it encourages you to copy what you see other people doing rather than ask yourself what would most meet life-giving needs and be creative. So if you see every other organization around you doing certifications and worrying about copyright, you do too, unless you have some specific awareness of how that doesn’t serve life and a commitment to doing it differently.
But then I figure geez, I’m just making up things here, supposing the internal experience of other people, and is all this guesswork and story-telling-about-others really connecting me to life? Not sure it is.
My hope is that this awareness will come upon the people inside CNVC, from discussions here and other places, and then the individual people inside will reflect on it and then we’ll all have more valuable information on how domination structures replicate themselves, perhaps without the consent or awareness of the people in them.
Meanwhile, I want to focus on being creative with my own life-giving needs and seeing through my own training to conform. =)
Emma
John Mudie
Mar 16, 2008, 11:28:38 PM3/16/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com, jo...@mudie.us
WARNING: This message contains judgmental statements and unsolicited advice.
It has not been translated into giraffe.
Read at your own risk of being triggered.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Yeah Emily. I see it too, But my learning about domination structures is that in general they continue until people who are being dominated refuse to be dominated anymore and start taking action. My favorite way of taking action is that espoused by people like Gandhi, Martin Luther King etc. Unfortunately this approach does seem to involve a lot of pain on the part of the people who don’t want to be dominated anymore. Especially that of the leaders who tend to be killed.
AA does seem to have evolved kinda peacefully from a dominating structure to a more democratic approach. Their approach does seem to be satisfying most everyone’s needs and may be worth studying for those interested in this subject
John
John Mudie
Mar 17, 2008, 12:11:30 AM3/17/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com, jo...@mudie.us
When I watched http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/229 to the end, I felt thrilled and joyful because it met my needs for learning and understanding about what might be happening in my brain as I/we transition from Jackal Consciousness to Giraffe Consciousness.
And I got real grateful to NVC because it helps me assist in the process of making it happen in myself and others.
Are you willing to share how you felt when you watched the movie to the end?
John
Niklas Wilkens
Mar 17, 2008, 3:31:38 AM3/17/08
to nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
Hey John,
thank you very much for the link. I feel moved having seen the presentation. It took me a moment to realize how moved Jill Bolte Taylor was herself and how important this was to her. That did the job of connection for me.
I've heard Valentina Rosenberg mention this distinction between the jackal-brain and the giraffe-brain. And I'm still not sure what to do with it. I feel a bit reluctant to imagine that it's that simple, that we just have two parts of the brain which function very differently and which create, according to their development, completely different worldviews and relationships to the world and oneself. I admit that the case of the stroke is a strong one as it allows to observe this from the inside. And the fact that Jill Bolte Taylor shares this, I find very enriching and interesting.
The danger I see in this is the conclusion one draws from it. It's so easy to make again judgements about one part of oneself. "That's the jackal-part, that's the one I don't want to take care of." And this is precisely not the giraffe-consciousness that I want. It's again creating a dualism, a split. And I don't see any use in this, as this is what creates the problem in the first place.
But maybe this isn't your conclusion at all? Maybe I'm overlooking other possible conclusion which would have a real benefit? I'm curious.
What I defenitely like is the choice she mentions. Every moment we can come in contact with this place of unity and peace.
Kindly
Niklas
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:11:30 -0700
> Von: "John Mudie" <jo...@mudie.info>
> An: nvc-e...@googlegroups.com
> CC: jo...@mudie.us
> Betreff: What\'s the difference in brain operation between Jackals and Giraffes ?
> When I watched http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/229 to the end, I felt
> thrilled and joyful because it met my needs for learning and understanding
> about what might be happening in my brain as I/we transition from Jackal
> Consciousness to Giraffe Consciousness.
>
>
>
> And I got real grateful to NVC because it helps me assist in the process
> of
> making it happen in myself and others.
>
>
>
> Are you willing to share how you felt when you watched the movie to the
> end?
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
--
Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört?
Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger
Emma McCreary
Mar 17, 2008, 5:14:32 AM3/17/08
to NVC Evolves
When I watched the video, I really appreciated the clarity between the
two consciousness, but I don't see one as "giraffe" and the other as
"jackal".
I think of NVC as being more about the heart and the body's
consciousness, than the brain. The right-brain consciousness is
expanded and aware of the energy of everything, but I think the heart
is the center of compassion and human-to-human connection. IE the
right-brain is the center of mystical consciousness and the heart is
the center of related consciousness. Mystical consciousness is about
the direct experience of the Divine - of All That Is, right now.
Related consciousness is about seeing another as part of yourself, and
thus experiencing empathy and compassion. NVC is more about that
consciousness of being related than about the consciousness of mystic
realizations. This has been an important distinction for me because
mystical consciousness comes quite easily to me but I have found that
it doesn't translate directly into related consciousness. =)
I also honor the way the brains work together. In her presentation,
when she talked of being completely in right-brain consciousness, it
was very hard for her to focus on anything in particular. So while
that can be very peaceful and expanded, it's the left-brain that does
the work of integrating that awareness into something that helps in
the real world. I honor and appreciate that. I don't see it as
particularly helpful to be just in the right-brain. My goal is to
integrate and balance the left brain, right brain, heart, and body, so
they all work together.
NVC is also a lot about language - a language of life. Language is all
in the left brain, so if the left brain was really a "jackal brain",
then nobody would ever be able to learn NVC. =)
I think jackal is what happens when we disconnect from our heart-
connection to each other and our left-brain uses whatever it can to
try to help us survive. Now if you're completely in right-brain land,
you aren't in jackal exactly, because you have no language. But you
aren't in giraffe either! You can't connect to anyone still. And
sometimes you meet people like this, who are very in tune with the
Universe but you can't have a conversation with them and feel
connected to them. It's like they are in outer space. Very peaceful.
But not connected to other people or to themselves, the human part of
themselves. Which is fine, nothing wrong with it at all! Just not what
NVC is about particularly.
If you can't focus on the difference between "me" and "you", you can't
really offer empathy. Empathy requires you to be about the other
person, focus on them, and offer them reflection and compassion about
where they are at - from their perspective. It requires the ability to
take a *subjective* perspective. Full right-brain consciousness, as
she was describing it in this video, is not subjective at all, it's
more about direct perception of sensory reality of the present moment
all at once. But not the internal experience of another human.
These are my theories from my internal experience and a mashup of
various perspectives from classes etc, your mileage may vary. =)
Emma
two consciousness, but I don't see one as "giraffe" and the other as
"jackal".
I think of NVC as being more about the heart and the body's
consciousness, than the brain. The right-brain consciousness is
expanded and aware of the energy of everything, but I think the heart
is the center of compassion and human-to-human connection. IE the
right-brain is the center of mystical consciousness and the heart is
the center of related consciousness. Mystical consciousness is about
the direct experience of the Divine - of All That Is, right now.
Related consciousness is about seeing another as part of yourself, and
thus experiencing empathy and compassion. NVC is more about that
consciousness of being related than about the consciousness of mystic
realizations. This has been an important distinction for me because
mystical consciousness comes quite easily to me but I have found that
it doesn't translate directly into related consciousness. =)
I also honor the way the brains work together. In her presentation,
when she talked of being completely in right-brain consciousness, it
was very hard for her to focus on anything in particular. So while
that can be very peaceful and expanded, it's the left-brain that does
the work of integrating that awareness into something that helps in
the real world. I honor and appreciate that. I don't see it as
particularly helpful to be just in the right-brain. My goal is to
integrate and balance the left brain, right brain, heart, and body, so
they all work together.
NVC is also a lot about language - a language of life. Language is all
in the left brain, so if the left brain was really a "jackal brain",
then nobody would ever be able to learn NVC. =)
I think jackal is what happens when we disconnect from our heart-
connection to each other and our left-brain uses whatever it can to
try to help us survive. Now if you're completely in right-brain land,
you aren't in jackal exactly, because you have no language. But you
aren't in giraffe either! You can't connect to anyone still. And
sometimes you meet people like this, who are very in tune with the
Universe but you can't have a conversation with them and feel
connected to them. It's like they are in outer space. Very peaceful.
But not connected to other people or to themselves, the human part of
themselves. Which is fine, nothing wrong with it at all! Just not what
NVC is about particularly.
If you can't focus on the difference between "me" and "you", you can't
really offer empathy. Empathy requires you to be about the other
person, focus on them, and offer them reflection and compassion about
where they are at - from their perspective. It requires the ability to
take a *subjective* perspective. Full right-brain consciousness, as
she was describing it in this video, is not subjective at all, it's
more about direct perception of sensory reality of the present moment
all at once. But not the internal experience of another human.
These are my theories from my internal experience and a mashup of
various perspectives from classes etc, your mileage may vary. =)
Emma
E.G Hornfield
Mar 18, 2008, 2:22:30 AM3/18/08
to NVC Evolves
yay EMMA! I so enjoyed reading your post(s) In your writing i get
eager and all activated because it makes sense to me and it appears im
aligned to similar observations / theories. I really enjoy having
this sense of common meaning, so thank you for you:)
GEEZ, maybe people are so caught up in teaching something, changing
something, making money to survive, positioning themselves in place
for status or power, because hey, NVC is a great sell:), or yes,
they're unaware of they're own contradictions because they're so
focused on packaging, training, organzing,and the above, to look at
themselves and say WHAT UP? lol
Though yes, im just theorizing too.
eZ
PS: The people at NVC Training Institute, from my experience, appear
to be quite subversive within CNVC.
Maybe we could invite them onto the forum?
On Mar 16, 4:43 pm, "Emma McCreary" <e...@redacorn.org> wrote:
> I've wondered this too - how could people steeped in NVC not see the obvious
eager and all activated because it makes sense to me and it appears im
aligned to similar observations / theories. I really enjoy having
this sense of common meaning, so thank you for you:)
GEEZ, maybe people are so caught up in teaching something, changing
something, making money to survive, positioning themselves in place
for status or power, because hey, NVC is a great sell:), or yes,
they're unaware of they're own contradictions because they're so
focused on packaging, training, organzing,and the above, to look at
themselves and say WHAT UP? lol
Though yes, im just theorizing too.
eZ
PS: The people at NVC Training Institute, from my experience, appear
to be quite subversive within CNVC.
Maybe we could invite them onto the forum?
On Mar 16, 4:43 pm, "Emma McCreary" <e...@redacorn.org> wrote:
> I've wondered this too - how could people steeped in NVC not see the obvious
Susan L
Apr 28, 2008, 7:02:12 PM4/28/08
to NVC Evolves
Although I've known about this group and what it's about from the
outset, I just joined today because I knew I would not be available to
participate in the month of March. It has taken me this long after a
seven-week road trip to catch up with the rest of my life and read all
of the old posts; I didn't want to join until I did that. I found
much food for thought as well as stimuli for both LOL and mourning as
I read, and I promise to go back to some of the discussions
*eventually* and put in my two cents' worth.
I decided to introduce myself in this thread because I thought it was
bizarre that your choice of the name NVC-Evolves would even be a
matter for concern. If CNVC wanted to "avoid confusion" by laying
claim to that name, they could have claimed it at any time. I'm
dismayed by the fact that nobody bothered to tell you more about
CNVC's Evolution Circle, so I can do that as my first contribution.
As far as I'm concerned, you are the ones who are discussing the
evolution of the NVC model, not the Evolution Circle of CNVC. As
difficult as it is to do given the fact that the information is
scattered in different places on the internet, diligent research will
reveal that the purpose of CNVC's Evolution Circle is to make sure
that every drop of Marshall's accumulated experience, all of his
stories, his teachings, his body of wisdom, etc., are captured for
posterity. CNVC has expressed concern that they want the NVC movement
to outlive Marshall - that we be a movement and not a cult.
I would propose that the Evolution Circle of CNVC be renamed. Why not
call it what it is - the Longevity Circle or the Posterity Circle or
the Preservation Circle - and let the new generation of leaders take
care of the evolution of the movement and the model?
I found myself stimulated by some of the other topics in this thread,
but before I comment further, I want to share some thoughts about my
unmet need for ease in doing that. I saw both mournings and
celebrations about the length of some of the posts. I also saw
mournings about people not getting the response to their ideas that
they were longing for. It would be SO HELPFUL to me, and I suspect to
others, if people would start a new thread (by clicking on +new post
in the right side bar) when they wish to change the subject. A rule
of n'etiquette that my cyber-savvy son insists on is "one subject, one
post" - and I agree that it aids in clarity of communication. On the
other hand, it would be SO HELPFUL to me, and I suspect to others, if
people would refrain from starting a new thread when they want to
comment on a prior post but rather use the Reply button at the lower
left corner of the post they are commenting on. It would also
contribute to ease and clarity if people would delete the portions of
the post that they are replying to that they are not quoting as part
of their reply. When people don't do that, especially on a long
thread like this, I can't sort out what the current author is saying
because all the prior posts are repeated. Finally, if there is
anyone's needs that would not be met by doing these things, would you
be willing to Reply to this post and dance with me?
Peace and Love
Susan Livingston
outset, I just joined today because I knew I would not be available to
participate in the month of March. It has taken me this long after a
seven-week road trip to catch up with the rest of my life and read all
of the old posts; I didn't want to join until I did that. I found
much food for thought as well as stimuli for both LOL and mourning as
I read, and I promise to go back to some of the discussions
*eventually* and put in my two cents' worth.
I decided to introduce myself in this thread because I thought it was
bizarre that your choice of the name NVC-Evolves would even be a
matter for concern. If CNVC wanted to "avoid confusion" by laying
claim to that name, they could have claimed it at any time. I'm
dismayed by the fact that nobody bothered to tell you more about
CNVC's Evolution Circle, so I can do that as my first contribution.
As far as I'm concerned, you are the ones who are discussing the
evolution of the NVC model, not the Evolution Circle of CNVC. As
difficult as it is to do given the fact that the information is
scattered in different places on the internet, diligent research will
reveal that the purpose of CNVC's Evolution Circle is to make sure
that every drop of Marshall's accumulated experience, all of his
stories, his teachings, his body of wisdom, etc., are captured for
posterity. CNVC has expressed concern that they want the NVC movement
to outlive Marshall - that we be a movement and not a cult.
I would propose that the Evolution Circle of CNVC be renamed. Why not
call it what it is - the Longevity Circle or the Posterity Circle or
the Preservation Circle - and let the new generation of leaders take
care of the evolution of the movement and the model?
I found myself stimulated by some of the other topics in this thread,
but before I comment further, I want to share some thoughts about my
unmet need for ease in doing that. I saw both mournings and
celebrations about the length of some of the posts. I also saw
mournings about people not getting the response to their ideas that
they were longing for. It would be SO HELPFUL to me, and I suspect to
others, if people would start a new thread (by clicking on +new post
in the right side bar) when they wish to change the subject. A rule
of n'etiquette that my cyber-savvy son insists on is "one subject, one
post" - and I agree that it aids in clarity of communication. On the
other hand, it would be SO HELPFUL to me, and I suspect to others, if
people would refrain from starting a new thread when they want to
comment on a prior post but rather use the Reply button at the lower
left corner of the post they are commenting on. It would also
contribute to ease and clarity if people would delete the portions of
the post that they are replying to that they are not quoting as part
of their reply. When people don't do that, especially on a long
thread like this, I can't sort out what the current author is saying
because all the prior posts are repeated. Finally, if there is
anyone's needs that would not be met by doing these things, would you
be willing to Reply to this post and dance with me?
Peace and Love
Susan Livingston
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages