Fw: Re: consensus

[rhonda varsane]

--- On Fri, 12/9/11, Veronica Navarro <invent...@gmail.com> wrote: From: Veronica Navarro <invent...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: consensus To: "rhonda varsane" <edi...@goodnewpress.net> Date: Friday, December 9, 2011, 12:49 PM We cannot seek consensus on a weekly basis through google groups.  These groups can get together to strategize, but making any permanent plans or events would still need to be passed through general assembly.  This was the way Occupy was originated and going the way of online consensus completely contradicts what has already been decided and voted on months ago.  I do like the idea of getting together to help gather info and decide what is coming next, but the process is the same.   On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 8:43 PM, rhonda varsane <edi...@goodnewpress.net> wrote: What are your thoughts on the liaisons from each city occupation and OTTO using googlegroups to discuss the issues. Are there any other ideas for statewide interaction/action. As you know if you do not participate you in fact have no say. I must also mention there are more than one person per city so if you could determine a permanent state liaison it would simplify the process. OTTO

[Occupy Austin]

and we also have plenty of time to try and spread that idea to local GA's to see if there is a statewide consensus

[rhonda varsane]

<br><br>--- On <b>Fri, 12/9/11, Veronica Navarro <i>&lt;invent...@gmail.com&gt;</i></b> wrote:<br><blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"><br>From: Veronica Navarro &lt;invent...@gmail.com&gt;<br>Subject: Re: consensus<br>To: "rhonda varsane" &lt;edi...@goodnewpress.net&gt;<br>Date: Friday, December 9, 2011, 4:30 PM<br><br><div id="yiv1555342929">I understand that. &nbsp;I think strategies can be formulated and can be done on this level, but if you want to bring it to the local occupies, it is something that needs to be done through verbal General Assembly. &nbsp;This occupation is not an online general consensus. &nbsp;We voted on this very early on. &nbsp;The purpose of it is to Occupy in person, front and center. &nbsp;Anything done online is for the purpose of strategizing only. &nbsp;General consensus can be reached through liaisons, but it would still need to be brought formally to GA.
&nbsp; &nbsp;I still am not sure that I'm on board with all of these groups that have been open and done without consensus. &nbsp;I don't really feel that it is fair to say everything you open with the name of occupy is actually occupy. &nbsp;None of these sites have been approved through GA and they don't represent the people. &nbsp; &nbsp;It is okay to take personal initiative and coordinate these events, but continuing to use the occupy name and not following occupy protocol sort of defeats the purpose.<div>
<br><br><div class="yiv1555342929gmail_quote">On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 2:25 PM, rhonda varsane <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:edi...@goodnewpress.net" target="_blank" href="/mc/compose?to=edi...@goodnewpress.net">edi...@goodnewpress.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="yiv1555342929gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit;" valign="top">If you are functioning state wide V you can not all be at the same GA at one time. The question is how best to get the information out from the state to the cities. And how the liaison, which will only be one person per occupation, will interact with the state occupation.<br>

<br>--- On <b>Fri, 12/9/11, Veronica Navarro <i>&lt;<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:invent...@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="/mc/compose?to=invent...@gmail.com">invent...@gmail.com</a>&gt;</i></b> wrote:<br><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid rgb(16,16,255);margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;">

<br>From: Veronica Navarro &lt;<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:invent...@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="/mc/compose?to=invent...@gmail.com">invent...@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>Subject: Re: consensus<br>To: "rhonda varsane" &lt;<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:edi...@goodnewpress.net" target="_blank" href="/mc/compose?to=edi...@goodnewpress.net">edi...@goodnewpress.net</a>&gt;<br>

Date: Friday, December 9, 2011, 12:49 PM<div><div></div><div><br><br><div>We cannot seek consensus on a weekly basis through google groups. &nbsp;These groups can get together to strategize, but making any permanent plans or events would still need to be passed
through general assembly. &nbsp;This was the way Occupy was originated and going the way of online consensus completely contradicts what has already been decided and voted on months ago.&nbsp;<div>
<br></div><div>I do like the idea of getting together to help gather info and decide what is coming next, but the process is the same. &nbsp;<br><div><br></div><div><br><div>On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 8:43 PM, rhonda varsane <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://mc/compose?to=edi...@goodnewpress.net">edi...@goodnewpress.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">What are your thoughts on the liaisons from each city occupation and OTTO using googlegroups to discuss the issues.<br>

<br>
Are there any other ideas for statewide interaction/action.<br>
<br>
As you know if you do not participate you in fact have no say. I must also mention there are more than one person per city so if you could determine a permanent state liaison it would simplify the process.<br>
<br>
OTTO<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>
</div></div></div></blockquote></td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote></div><br>
</div>
</div></blockquote>

[rhonda varsane]

--- On Fri, 12/9/11, rhonda varsane <edi...@goodnewpress.net> wrote: From: rhonda varsane <edi...@goodnewpress.net> Subject: Re: consensus To: "Veronica Navarro" <invent...@gmail.com> Date: Friday, December 9, 2011, 4:37 PM How would you get the liaison for 24 cities together to one (state) GA to speak. Please understand each occupation chooses thru their GA a liaison to the state. The liaison will bring any and all information to their GA. How would you share statewide information with each city GA from the state. How would you set up a state occupation which includes one liaison from each city. How would you get the information and contact information for each city so they can be contacted.

--- On Fri, 12/9/11, Veronica Navarro <invent...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Veronica Navarro <invent...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: consensus To: "rhonda varsane" <edi...@goodnewpress.net>

Date: Friday, December 9, 2011, 4:30 PM

I understand that.  I think strategies can be formulated and can be done on this level, but if you want to bring it to the local occupies, it is something that needs to be done through verbal General Assembly.  This occupation is not an online general consensus.  We voted on this very early on.  The purpose of it is to Occupy in person, front and center.  Anything done online is for the purpose of strategizing only.  General consensus can be reached through liaisons, but it would still need to be brought formally to GA.    I still am not sure that I'm on board with all of these groups that have been open and done without consensus.  I don't really feel that it is fair to say everything you open with the name of occupy is actually occupy.  None of these sites have been approved through GA and they don't represent the people.    It is okay to take personal initiative and coordinate these events, but continuing to use the occupy name and not following occupy protocol sort of defeats the purpose.

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 2:25 PM, rhonda varsane <edi...@goodnewpress.net> wrote:

If you are functioning state wide V you can not all be at the same GA at one time. The question is how best to get the information out from the state to the cities. And how the liaison, which will only be one person per occupation, will interact with the state occupation.

--- On Fri, 12/9/11, Veronica Navarro <invent...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Veronica Navarro <invent...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: consensus To: "rhonda varsane" <edi...@goodnewpress.net>

Date: Friday, December 9, 2011, 12:49 PM

We cannot seek consensus on a weekly basis through google groups.  These groups can get together to strategize, but making any permanent plans or events would still need to be passed through general assembly.  This was the way Occupy was originated and going the way of online consensus completely contradicts what has already been decided and voted on months ago.

I do like the idea of getting together to help gather info and decide what is coming next, but the process is the same.

On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 8:43 PM, rhonda varsane <edi...@goodnewpress.net> wrote:

What are your thoughts on the liaisons from each city occupation and OTTO using googlegroups to discuss the issues.

Are there any other ideas for statewide interaction/action.

As you know if you do not participate you in fact have no say. I must also mention there are more than one person per city so if you could determine a permanent state liaison it would simplify the process.

OTTO

[rhonda varsane]

--- On Fri, 12/9/11, rhonda varsane <edi...@goodnewpress.net> wrote:

From: rhonda varsane <edi...@goodnewpress.net> Subject: Re: consensus To: "Veronica Navarro" <invent...@gmail.com>

Date: Friday, December 9, 2011, 4:42 PM wow who are you speaking about, who are all the groups you speak of. The occupycongress is an action. Interoccupy is a source of information????? Name the occupations you are talking about. I think you do not understand, is it the word consensus which you do not understand. Everyone I know is using their GA who are the exceptions? "on board with all of these groups that have been open and done without consensus" Besides the media for Dallas? Why would a liaison not bring the info to the GA? "None of these sites have been approved through GA", what sites?? Are you with Occupy Dallas????