Meetings

[Scott F]

Hi to everybody,
Some are trying to reformat meetings and GA facilitator of it.
I think the only way to maintain some semblence of order is to follow
the original method. And, meetings can be a little "looser" in
structure. Looser worked better at the meeting I facilitated on
Tuesday. Also be wary of proposals that are "too large of question"
posed to the smaller grroup. Big decisions need to be up to the GA.
Meetings are great for passing along commettee info.
Good luck, Facilitating is very cool.

[Bryan Silber]

Scott,

Before I address your comment, could please clarify proposals that are "to
large of question". What does that mean?

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Hi Bryan,
What I meant was, proposals were being made on Tuesday eve that were considered by the small group to make effecting our local movement. Hope this claifies
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

[Gabriel Laszlo]

I'm pleased with process we already have in place. Yes, it is a slow
process but It seems to be working just fine all around the World, why
should we bother reinventing a wheel that isn't broken?

We're doing it!,
g

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

On Oct 27, 5:17 pm, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm pleased with process we already have in place. Yes, it is a slow
> process but It seems to be working just fine all around the World, why
> should we bother reinventing a wheel that isn't broken?
>
> We're doing it!,
> g
>
>

> I must respectfully disagree with one thing!!! If what we are doing is working, then why are we so small!! We started off with around 300 & we are now down to around 50 ~ IMO ... As someone who has been there every night and participating ~ I do not see it working!!! I will agree that at the larger Sat G.A.'s, the procedure is necessary, but needs improvement!!! Better facilitation and "signage" to keep EVERYONE able to participate. With 2 or more people holding up signs showing which section we are on at that moment, we could reduce the many complaints, as heard by Rachael. For example signs which say "proposals" ~ "questions or concerns" ~ "friendly amendments" etc.. etc.. can be held up at each appropriate time... SIMPLE!!!! Why does everything need to be sooo complicated?!?! IMO, even signs showing & explaining "ALL" the hand signals, should be showing at all times. IMO, the topic of discussion should be written for all to see & refer to at all times!!!! Anyone who happens to walk up to any larger Sat. G.A., at any time should immediately be able to understand the process and subsequently feel included.


The unfortunate, the down trodden, the disenfranchised, the poor, the
weak, the homeless etc.. need to be included!!! Fortunately, I am
intelligent & educated but, sadly many are not!!! I am here to stand
up for those people!!! Fortunately, I am not hard of hearing, but some
are. I am here to stand up for those people!!! Fortunately, I am not
yet elderly, but some are. I am here to stand up for those people!!!
You see my point, I am sure!!! Those who are physically disabled
deserve to be accommodated!!! I am here to stand up for those
people!!! Those who are mentally disabled with ADD, OCD, SPD, ADHD,
HFA, etc... are also being excluded!!!! I am here to stand up for
those people!!! Even Garrison has made it quite clear that not
everyone is able to process information verbally. I am here to stand
up for those people!!! ~ I WILL NOT GO AWAY!!!

As you can see, I feel passionately about the many people looking to
be part of Occupy who are being excluded & not being heard!!! If we
cannot accommodate these people, then we are no better than the
1% !!!!! That is exactly what they have done to the 99% & we are not
going to take it any more!!

I did hear Scott talk of a provision within the procedure which
addresses these concerns.
If I am not mistaken, he said, this qualifies the disabled to go
first!!!!

In reality, these United States do have "The Americans with
Disabilities Act", which makes it illegal in this country NOT to
accommodate disabled people. This act was championed by the people,
for the people!!!!!

Those who are not familiar, or are confused or otherwise unhappy with
the procedure, will not return!!! Those who do not feel heard will not
return!!! We should be growing, not shrinking!!!

Again, I must reiterate, I AM ONLY SPEAKING HERE OF MY OPINIONS
CONCERNING THE LARGER SAT. GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. ~ MY OPINION ON THE
SMALLER 7pm NIGHTLY MEETINGS, IS NOT AT ALL THE SAME.

[Gabriel Laszlo]

Speaking AS a person that is disabled I haven't ever felt excluded!

--g

[Gabriel Laszlo]

And as far as our GA's we're trying to form a "perfect representative
Democracy." Democracy is a slow and tedious process, just read "The
Federalist Papers."

--g

[Locksmith Lady WPB]

Hi Gabe.. it is me Sheryl... I know you are disabled .. Did you feel that, from where you were sitting, you could have participated in the larger Sat G.A.??? Were you even able to hear what was going on??? Were you able to understand when would be your turn to speak up??  I know personally it is not comfortable for you to speak up. But think of those physically disabled who do wish to be heard... where would they sit???

If signs were being held or paraded like boxing girls, then they could sit anywhere and be able!!! They should be accommodated, just as you should!!!

Did I send that out to just you, or to everyone!!!

Not so good with computers

On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeis...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Gabriel Laszlo]

Hi Sheryl! I DID participate, I was sitting at a table ... happily
doing something useful.

g

[Gabriel Laszlo]

And IDK either. I haven't delved into the nuances of this whole new
ethos/mythos model.

g

[Lisa E.]

First of all, thank you to all who are maintaining the occupation during this relentless rainy week.  I admire each of you for your sacrifice and efforts.

To the Consensus Practitioners:

I appreciate that you are all attempting to formalize some method of communication and decision making, but I find the militant consensus process torture. 

I will say that probably MORE than 99% of the 99% have no idea what formal consensus process is nor do they care to learn a new strange, stylized communication method in order participate in Occupy or simply to express their long festering outrage, fear, shame, and horror over the issues that might otherwise attract them to Occupy.

Instead of setting a largely unknown"Official language" (Consensus), I personally believe the Occupy movement would be much better served by encouraging people to educate themselves about the background of the financial crisis, the truth about the Federal Reserve, the abhorrent lack of transparency and accountability for the financial alchemists who brought down the global economy, the truth about foreclosure fraud, the specific examples of loopholes that allow wealthy or corporations to evade taxes that the rest of us must pay, specific examples of corruption in Florida's government and/or judiciary that has greatly harmed millions of Floridians, the damage done by the Citizens United decision, etc.

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to voice my opinion.  I have heard similar sentiments from others over the past week.

Lisa

[John Tracey]

Seconded, Lisa.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Interesting point, but it does not answer how decisions are made or who makes them. How do you propose this be solved?

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: "Lisa E." <lis...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 18:59:29 -0400

To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: Meetings

[Michael Redman]

I also agree with Lisa and John…

 

Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com [mailto:occupypalm...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Tracey
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 7:06 PM
To: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Meetings

 

Seconded, Lisa.

[John Tracey]

We all make decisions. If you're there, you get a say. If you're not, we need to move without you. This is said as a guy who works 6 days a week, 10 hours a day. I stay up on point when possible, and trust my fellow occupiers to do the right thing when I can't.

[Lisa E.]

I envision it could look something like this:

We have a loose structure of an extremely limited number of committees to start.  Those committees are limited to bare essentials.  We have a basic participatory structure for meetings that have a purpose/agenda with proposals followed by comment/question period, limited perhaps by 1 minute comments and then a vote unless the comments make it clear that the proposal is dead in the water demanding more time/thought/reworking before reintroducing.

Organically, participants will come up with ideas and form committees around issues they are passionate about and invested in and present proposals that those who are not as invested in the specific issues could never imagine.  These proposals will bubble up in an amazing, creative way in the airy space allowed by natural, relaxed conversation, as opposed to the narrow space of a formal, facilitated, unnatural conversation.

We re-evaluate, adapt, and change as the movement evolves.

I was not involved in the decision to impose facilitated Consensus process on the group.  Whatever process was used to arrive at that decision should be reconsidered.

--
Lisa Epstein
ForeclosureHamlet.org
Latest Fraudclosure News on Twitter here
Blog
Facebook

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

John, this is about decisions made not by a group appointed by the GA, I think a self appointed group is making decisions or suggestions. And I think I was present to witness some of this two or three weeks ago. I think a few people are doing a great job, including you. Yet I also feel that there is a hidden power base within OPB, and honestly, it doesn't sit well. It explains why some proposals are followed through and others are not.
Lisa now makes a great point. She says a limited number of committees, and may I add that the committee members themselves put forth a leader, not the other way around as it is now. I hope you take this as constructive as it is intended.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: John Tracey <jtra...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 19:24:30 -0400

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

I agree with Lisa on this part:

"I will say that probably MORE than 99% of the 99% have no idea what
formal
consensus process is nor do they care to learn a new strange,
stylized
communication method in order participate in Occupy or simply to
express
their long festering outrage, fear, shame, and horror over the issues
that
might otherwise attract them to Occupy."

As everyone already knows
~ I TOO FIND THIS MILITANT CONSENSUS PROCESS TO BE TORTURE!!!
Particularly in the smaller daily 7pm meetings!!!!

I truly believe that signage would have tremendous impact on resolving
many of the problems of the larger Sat. G.A.

I truly believe that the smaller daily 7pm meetings could work using a
SIMPLE circle theory, with a facilitator!! I do not see why we could
not just try it, one time, and see how it goes. However, since it was
my "proposal", I feel I should be allowed to facilitate the first try.
This way I could be assured that my idea is carried out as envisioned.
After that, anyone can do it with ease!! The facilitators we have now
are also confused by the consensus process. The circle theory is so
easy, anyone who walks up at any time could easily see how it works!!!

One person says their issue & it gets written on the erase board. Then
going around the circle say whatever they want about that topic. We go
around & around until everyone has said everything they want on that
topic. If a consensus is then need on that topic it will be taken.
Then the next person in the circle says their issue.... and so forth
around & around until everyone is able to bring up their issue and be
heard on every topic!!! Yes this will still have the time problem but,
it will eliminate much confusion & no-one will feel left-out or
unheard!!! If someone wishes to speak out of turn, they raise their
hand. If no-one objects, then let them speak!!! As someone else said,
a talking stick could be added to this procedure. I am not totally
stuck on every detail of this plan & have no problem with the idea of
tweeking it, to make it work!!!!! I am all about finding & talking
about solutions, not problems. Can some one please tell me what would
"not" work about this plan, so I/we can work on finding solutions.

Organization, problem solving & creating structure are large part of
my skill set !!!

On Oct 30, 7:10 pm, clydes...@gmail.com wrote:
> Interesting point, but it does not answer how decisions are made or who makes them. How do you propose this be solved?
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Lisa E." <lisa...@gmail.com>
>
> Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 18:59:29

> To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> Reply-To: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > And IDK either. I haven't delved into the nuances of this whole new
> > ethos/mythos model.
>
> > g
>

> > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com>

> > wrote:
> > > Hi Sheryl! I DID participate, I was sitting at a table ... happily
> > > doing something useful.
>
> > > g
>
> > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Locksmith Lady WPB
> > > <locksmithlady...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Hi Gabe.. it is me Sheryl... I know you are disabled .. Did you feel
> > that,
> > >> from where you were sitting, you could have participated in the larger
> > Sat
> > >> G.A.??? Were you even able to hear what was going on??? Were you able to
> > >> understand when would be your turn to speak up??  I know personally it
> > is
> > >> not comfortable for you to speak up. But think of those physically
> > disabled
> > >> who do wish to be heard... where would they sit???
> > >> If signs were being held or paraded like boxing girls, then they could
> > sit
> > >> anywhere and be able!!! They should be accommodated, just as you
> > should!!!
>
> > >> Did I send that out to just you, or to everyone!!!
> > >> Not so good with computers
>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Gabriel Laszlo <

> > gabeisthen...@gmail.com>

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

Sheryl, that is exactly what I tried to introduce at a 7p meeting, a looser style. My experience was some people just can't shut the fuck up, and just talk talk talk on anything anybody says. A couple of frequent flyers make it soooooooo painful for the rest, and this creates the disharmony. I think a few people need to seriously check themselves at meetings, or be checked!!

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

Gabe,
When I said participate (in this context) I meant speak up within the
consensus process.

On Oct 30, 6:22 pm, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sheryl! I DID participate, I was sitting at a table ... happily
> doing something useful.
>
> g
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Locksmith Lady WPB
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <locksmithlady...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Gabe.. it is me Sheryl... I know you are disabled .. Did you feel that,
> > from where you were sitting, you could have participated in the larger Sat
> > G.A.??? Were you even able to hear what was going on??? Were you able to
> > understand when would be your turn to speak up??  I know personally it is
> > not comfortable for you to speak up. But think of those physically disabled
> > who do wish to be heard... where would they sit???
> > If signs were being held or paraded like boxing girls, then they could sit
> > anywhere and be able!!! They should be accommodated, just as you should!!!
>
> > Did I send that out to just you, or to everyone!!!
> > Not so good with computers
>

> > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com>

[Michael Redman]

My 2 cents for what it's worth...

Take it or leave it...

I believe, no matter how it goes forward, each "facilitator," "moderator,"
"process," etc. should be voted on / nominated by the group before it is
implemented. How do we accomplish this? We run a loosely type structure for
the next few meetings/weeks and get to know one another. Hear everyone on
their ideas, their thoughts, their proposals and get to know their
personalities and their positions. Once everyone knows everyone, we can
"elect" / "nominate" people to take on the tasks.

Not everyone is meant to "lead" even if their intentions are admirable.

I'm not even sure how some came into "leadership" positions in the last few
weeks and I know I am not alone on this...

It is not the group I initially committed to support when it was in its
infancy.

Michael

www.4closureFraud.org

Thanks for letting me voice my thoughts...

[clyd...@gmail.com]

I agree, in principle. Now practically, how does this work with new people coming and going? And, how does a a democratic group open to all deal with people that just can't STFU??

[Bryan Silber]

Right on...Lisa, Michael.

Many of us have been warning about the very nature of the GA/Consensus model from the genesis of this movement.  
It’s intention is to get us bogged down in a type of formalism that virtually  ensures no potent or effective strategy to break the power of Wall Street can emerge.  Meanwhile you become frustrated, exhausted until you just give up. It is essentially minority rules.

 Plus we already pay for the U.S. Senate, we don’t need another filibuster.

Look no further than our own numbers.  They are shrinking not because systemic change takes time as some continue to point out, but rather they have simply become disillusioned with the entire process.  

What we need is demands.  Revolutionary, transitional demands.     

Let everyone submit their own.  Announce that we are having a summit for demands.  Each of us can make our case, then vote using the American system of majority rules with the speech of the minority being protected.  Once we coalesce, leaders can emerge organically and we can begin to  build a real coalition.

At the end of the day, if our numbers are to rebound, we have to convince Joe Sixpack what we have to offer them?

Attached is the program that I am offering. I believe it to be the most radical, strongest program possible.  I look forward to discussing in more detail and seeing what everyone else has to offer.

Bryan  

[John Tracey]

The facilitators have arisen out of necessity. Anyone who wants to take on the thankless job of answering 68 emails a day, and finding themselves deadlocked on trying to institute anything, is more than free to volunteer. There are no back room dealings here, every decision we've made has been, whenever possible, made at the campsite in full view and with full participation from anyone willing to be there. Rachel has three people on supplies, Roberto has a few on outreach, I have 15-20 on media, from web designers, to facebook admin, to youtube, to contacts/mailing lists... I'm glad to be working now, but I'm 10 hours a day, 6 days a week, and don't really have time to mediate debates like this. Whatever facilitation goes with, I'm comfortable with. They're the ones who determine format for GA and other meetings, so if you're interested in guiding that process, hit them up. The format on Saturday worked better than ever before, thanks to the feedback from Sheryl and others. When the meeting isn't going well, in my opinion, I go set up tents and sweep for litter.

Bottom line, we're all in this together, no-one has made a dime yet, and we're inexperienced in activism for the most part. That's what gives us our power, I think. We aren't the typical activists that people are used to seeing protest. We're people just like them, who work, and vote, but usually don't get involved, camping out across the country and flooding our facebook pages. We've done the best we can with improvised and make shift solutions. If you have a problem with any committee, join it. If you take issue with the leader, commit to taking on the yoke first, and if you have a suggestion for something else we could be doing, please, volunteer. My plate is full, and I'm still not getting done everything I'd like to see done.

[Steve Ellman]

Right on, JT.

[John Tracey]

Seconded, Brian. Scott, as was pointed out to me, some people have different abilities which may make it difficult for them to follow a format without accomodation. We need to embrace/empower everyone.

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

Thanks John, you kinda made my point, when people like myself have come forward to do things, we get no reply, or it seems people have established some power base and "volunteer" to do all the work. Thus creating more power. I am on the facilitator committee , there was supposed to be a list? What the fuck happened to it? Elise wanted to handle it so bad, now where is the work. She blames another and so on. Yet I get called to "confrontational". To friggan bad. If your reading this and your a facilitator, where's the fuckin faciitator contact list??

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: John Tracey <jtra...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 20:55:06 -0400

To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: Meetings

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

That's beautiful John, but in the meen time GA's are falling apart. How do you suggest we salvage that and accommodate people who just speak endlessly without thinking?

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: John Tracey <jtra...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:00:29 -0400

To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: Meetings

[Steve Ellman]

This may be the kind of thing that just has to sort itself out over time. As John (I think it was) pointed out, last Sat's GA, small though it was (about 35 of us) went very smoothly.

[Steve Ellman]

I think we can modify the consensus model somewhat, as conditions require, but basically, stick to it until people get comfortable with it. We're in this for the long haul. Rome wasn't sacked in a day.

On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:09 PM, <sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net> wrote:

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Hi Steve, 35 is a very small turnout, we had hundreds at previous GA's. I think the local movement cannot wait to act on this decline in participation.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:11:47 -0400

[Steve Ellman]

I think we need to build an effective core on which to grow. A couple of hundred people venting won't accomplish anything.

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

Yes, but how do we proclaim "leaderless" then? My personal gut feeling is some kind of "steering committee be formally announced,(not the same group that we attended, totally new). It will be recognized as such, and start there. I am no longer interested in participating in that group. The very small group of steering member wannabee's can lobby for themselves at 7p meetings during the week and then vote of some sort may occur at a GA.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:17:05 -0400

[Steve Ellman]

No one proclaims it. The co-ordinating committee or advisory committee or whatever it's called arises spontaneously, through self-selection. Those who show up and make it work, make it happen. And if they really make it happen, it's accepted/modified by the larger GA. And as the GA's prove their effectiveness and do outreach, the GA's grow.
We need an effective organizational core.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

I think we want the same result, yet neither of us are able to convince each other which idea works.

I am down with change, but I think the biggest problem has been a few that are rude and won't STFU. Seriously, I think that is killing us locally

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:27:31 -0400

[Steve Ellman]

We need to keep order at meetings, mos def.

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

I think you have personally watched me facilitate when some just won't quit(stfu). Any suggestions? I have tried pacifist and just walking away, and the group just let's them continue. I have tried actively asking them to check themselves, and they claim free speech. It definitely is an exorcise is patience!

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:43:02 -0400

[Steve Ellman]

Wish I had an easy answer. Perhaps we should set up a free speech zone at every GA, separate from the GA itself, and tell those who want to sound off to go sound off there and leave the rest of us to the work.

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

Good idea Steve, I think it is this topic tah drove Christian away, and like him or not, he was good at it.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:51:16 -0400

[John Tracey]

@ Scott, by listening to them instead of talking over them. By setting limits on time, politely, and by getting to know them, individually. I have the same problems, and it's half, "Why do we use this format?" and half, "How could you forsake a format that works so well around the country!?"

There's no easy answer. I've found the only ego I can alter is my own, and focus my efforts there, and when I don't feel a meeting is productive, I find something that is.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Cool John, but walking away from the problem when on a committee(facilitator) isn't how I roll, as you wouldn't if the tabls was turned. Sometimesya just wanna say STFU for five minutes and let others play in the sand box. I think this topic is more important then many others, as I feel it is responsible for dwindling interest in GA's

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: John Tracey <jtra...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:55:02 -0400

[John Tracey]

I'm not on the facilitation committee, so I'm not sure. Did you get their numbers?

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

That's another frustration, the persons fighting to distribute the list dropped the ball. Jus sayin

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: John Tracey <jtra...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:59:28 -0400

To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: Meetings

[John Tracey]

I have the same frustrations. I have the same goals. I spend most of my time listening, and when I have something to say, I say it. When I notice that my ego is hindering the process, I humble myself, and help with tents.

My ego is the only part of this movement I control. I suggest everyone focus on that, as well. We have members with autism/OCD/Aspergers, and various other different abilities, and sometimes not being able to speak in turn is not their fault. Me debasing rather than embracing them is. "STFU" is pretty severe when you're talking to someone who doesn't understand why they are being told to. I put my energy where I can make the most difference, which happens to be in how I conduct myself.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

John, you still haven't given a suggestion on the declining attendance at GA's, yet you are happy to tell me how you would do things. That's happy talk with no solution, do the inmates run this asylum?

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: John Tracey <jtra...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 22:09:42 -0400

[Gabriel Laszlo]

I don't speak up very often but I feel I would be remiss if I didn't
point out that we need to be cautious of ego-traps, whatever is
decided.

g

[clyd...@gmail.com]

I will leave the conversation with this thought, An alcoholic is at a meeting, and because of his disease, he is drunk at disruptive to the progress of the assembly. And he does it again week after week. How would we deal with this as facilitators? To me it is no different then the afore mentioned disease's. Just food for thought, Good Night and Sleep dry Occupy'ers

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

[Gabriel Laszlo]

An alcoholic wouldn't get the sort of attention they're looking for
and therefore wouldn't come back "week after week." If you don't "feed
the Trolls" their attention wanes very rapidly ...

g

[John Tracey]

Clyde's dad, I have no clue who you are. I've given much feedback. Honestly, I'll let you find another movement. I haven't heard any solutions from you, either. I'm putting my time into this one. This isn't an asylum, and I'm insulted that you: #1: think that it is, #2 think that it's my responsibility to fix it. Again, if you have a problem with how it is run, join up. There's the solution. If you don't see that as a solution, perhaps you'd rather be part of the problem. In your own words, "STFU"

God bless, and God speed.

[John Tracey]

I've read enough emails today. Unless you're volunteering with fresh ideas, my time is worth 27 dollars an hour. Without a paypal link or a valid argument, I'm going to start billing you people.

[John Tracey]

Sorry, that was a bit harsh; (True, but harsh.) On the real, who knows what congressional district they live in? Who is your Governor? Congressman? Senate reps? Who knows the addresses? Which district do you live in? Who carries the voter registration cards in their pockets? Short any of these answers, "STFU" and listen. If your opinion doesn't matter to you, it doesn't matter to me. I hope all of you are registered to vote, and I hope I'll see you at the polls.

[Gabriel Laszlo]

;o) OK, every body take a few slow deep breaths. It's amazing but that
sh*t works!

g

[John Tracey]

Scott, I'm sorry, and I have to put this out there. You're kind of an asshole. I love you, and I love your passion. But you're a dick. How many nights have you camped out with us? How many nights have you brought them breakfast? I've checked my balls, and they're in check. Bigger than ever. Not sure what this has to do with the movement, but just for your personal reassurance, they're huge.

[Sarah]

The spirit of the occupy movement continues as we share our common
goals. This is not a process of high ideals and no action, as
evidenced by those that have chosen to camp and others to come out to
support.
Clarity of vision is also something different for each of us, also as
evidenced with the spirited debate over why we are there and how to
best act.
Let us not forget that we would not be here if we didn't care.
Sometimes it is good enough to agree to disagree.
Can we begin on what we do agree upon?
People get motivated to act for different reasons and what we seek to
change in others may also exist within ourselves. Remember that we all
mirror the world to one another.
I see the process is one of learning, growth and most definitely,
tolerance.
It is my understanding that no one in our group has worked or held a
political office, but I dare say you are getting the idea of how
difficult it is to govern. What we are doing here is govern the
activities of this group and we first have to all agree that we can
work it out. I am confident that everyone that has come to the occupy
events is looking for a way to help out and therefore we can work it
out.

As for the logistics, agenda items can easily be submitted in writing
before a meeting. And circulated, through these forums as instant
communication in fact. That way everyone knows why they are present
for each asesmbly.
The proposals can be presented and facilitation for the meetings occur
without it digressing, if a clear time frame is presented for each
item.
Each speaker is given up to three minutes to present.
If the list of speakers grows longer then the time allocated, the
group can decide to extend an agenda item for a longer period.
All of this with the understanding that the entire meeting length not
be more than 90 minutes. You definitely do not keep people longer than
this.
Any proposals that are not covered can be presented at the next GA.
And be first on the agenda.
Prioritizing the agenda and the set time for each item can also be
done through voting before the discussion gets underway. We have to
have strong time keepers and facilitataors.
They are there ONLY to keep the meeting running, not give comments or
side remarks on the merit or dismerit of the proposals. To keep people
from talking out of turn I recommended the talking stick.
If we follow this we can have a meeting with up to 6 agenda items of
15 minutes each. That means 5 people can speak to each item for 3
minutes or less.
Of course some items will take longer than others, but I think you get
the idea, If an agenda item will go longer than we all have to agree
to forgo a different agenda item, or table it.
Discussion on friendly amendments would also have to be limited, as
they will contribute to the time for each agenda item. Again a
formulation of taking the 'stack' for the friendly amendment and if it
grows longer than time allotted, again a vote be taken to either table
another agenda item and continue this one, or send it to committee.
It just makes sense that if an agenda item is taking too long for the
GA, it may need to go to a committee for a more thorough
investigation.
This is not to limit discussion, but open it up in a more exploratory
manner. Then when it comes back from the committee, it can be as a
result of the many conversations we can share through our 'other'
communication devices for all stakeholders.
This way a formalized proposal that considers all the input from the
committee would then be presented.
How does this first proposal sound? We take agenda items up front, in
writing? We can always open a time for 'Other Business' to take agenda
items from the floor.

[Sarah]

In addition another person had written in the NEEDS LIST at the camp:

Coaching station: help supporters find their place and passion and
strengths to share with the 'affirmation movement'. And she
volunteered to help : Sally Falb, CPC.
I think this is a great idea as well!

> > argument, I'm going to start billing you people.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[David Hodges]

wow. a word of caution my sisters and  brothers - consider the tactic or divide and conquer. the deepest desire of those who have robbed us of our freedom is that we devour each other - piece by piece, thread by thread. that way, the movement dies, and they never have to lift a finger. we must tread lightly and be generous with each other. this is a new day. we need to work hard to strip away old habits and thoughts and ideas without slicing each other to pieces. we need to work this shit into the soil and make room for a new things to grow. this is not about numbers and process and egos. this is about reclaiming a space. a space to get to know each other. a space to be human. a space to remember that everything relates to everything else. a space to remember, like it or not, we're all in this together. unless we reclaim this space, this relational, mutual, global space, no significant action will follow. we are standing on a precipice, hovering in sacred spaces - we are not alone. this is not about me. this is not about you. this is not about us and them. this is about us. together. united. with respect woven into every difference of opinion. we can do this.

let's go camping.

another world is necessary. another world is possible. occupy everything.

[Lynn Szymoniak]

Would you please unsubscribe me from this email list.

I support you and applaud your efforts, but do not want to receive all of these communications.

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

Gabe, ya know I love ya... but u did not answer my questions

On Oct 30, 6:22 pm, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sheryl! I DID participate, I was sitting at a table ... happily
> doing something useful.
>
> g
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Locksmith Lady WPB
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <locksmithlady...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Gabe.. it is me Sheryl... I know you are disabled .. Did you feel that,
> > from where you were sitting, you could have participated in the larger Sat
> > G.A.??? Were you even able to hear what was going on??? Were you able to
> > understand when would be your turn to speak up??  I know personally it is
> > not comfortable for you to speak up. But think of those physically disabled
> > who do wish to be heard... where would they sit???
> > If signs were being held or paraded like boxing girls, then they could sit
> > anywhere and be able!!! They should be accommodated, just as you should!!!
>
> > Did I send that out to just you, or to everyone!!!
> > Not so good with computers
>
> > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >> Speaking AS a person that is disabled I haven't ever felt excluded!
>
> >> --g
>
> >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Snyder,  Sheryl & Brandon
> >> <locksmithlady...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > On Oct 27, 5:17 pm, Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> I'm pleased with process we already have in place. Yes, it is a slow
> >> >> process but It seems to be working just fine all around the World, why
> >> >> should we bother reinventing a wheel that isn't broken?
>
> >> >> We're doing it!,
> >> >> g
>
> >> >> I must respectfully disagree with one thing!!! If what we are doing is
> >> >> working, then why are we so small!! We started off with around 300 & we are
> >> >> now down to around 50 ~ IMO ... As someone who has been there every night
> >> >> and participating ~ I do not see it working!!! I will agree that at the
> >> >> larger Sat G.A.'s, the procedure is necessary, but needs improvement!!!
> >> >> Better facilitation and "signage" to keep EVERYONE able to participate. With
> >> >> 2 or more people holding up signs showing which section we are on at that
> >> >> moment, we could reduce the many complaints, as heard by Rachael. For
> >> >> example signs which say "proposals" ~ "questions or concerns" ~ "friendly
> >> >> amendments"  etc.. etc.. can be held up at each appropriate time...
> >> >> SIMPLE!!!! Why does everything need to be sooo complicated?!?!  IMO, even
> >> >> signs showing & explaining  "ALL"  the hand signals, should be showing at
> >> >> all times. IMO, the topic of discussion should be written for all to see &
> >> >> refer to at all times!!!! Anyone who happens to walk up to any larger Sat.
> >> >> G.A., at any time should immediately be able to understand the process and
> >> >> subsequently feel included.
>
> >> > The unfortunate, the down trodden, the disenfranchised, the poor, the
> >> > weak, the homeless etc..  need to be included!!! Fortunately, I am
> >> > intelligent & educated but, sadly many are not!!! I am here to stand
> >> > up for those people!!! Fortunately, I am not hard of hearing, but some
> >> > are. I am here to stand up for those people!!! Fortunately, I am not
> >> > yet elderly, but some are. I am here to stand up for those people!!!
> >> > You see my point, I am sure!!! Those who are physically disabled
> >> > deserve to be accommodated!!! I am here to stand up for those
> >> > people!!! Those who are mentally disabled with ADD, OCD, SPD, ADHD,
> >> > HFA, etc... are also being excluded!!!! I am here to stand up for
> >> > those people!!! Even Garrison has made it quite clear that not
> >> > everyone is able to process information verbally. I am here to stand
> >> > up for those people!!!  ~ I WILL NOT GO AWAY!!!
>
> >> > As you can see, I feel passionately about the many people looking to
> >> > be part of Occupy who are being excluded & not being heard!!! If we
> >> > cannot accommodate these people, then we are no better than the
> >> > 1% !!!!! That is exactly what they have done to the 99% & we are not
> >> > going to take it any more!!
>
> >> > I did hear Scott talk of a provision within the procedure which
> >> > addresses these concerns.
> >> > If I am not mistaken, he said, this qualifies the disabled to go
> >> > first!!!!
>
> >> > In reality, these United States do have  "The Americans with
> >> > Disabilities Act", which makes it illegal in this country NOT to
> >> > accommodate disabled people. This act was championed by the people,
> >> > for the people!!!!!
>
> >> > Those who are not familiar, or are confused or otherwise unhappy with
> >> > the procedure, will not return!!! Those who do not feel heard will not
> >> > return!!! We should be growing, not shrinking!!!
>
> >> > Again, I must reiterate, I AM ONLY SPEAKING HERE OF MY OPINIONS
> >> > CONCERNING THE LARGER SAT. GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. ~ MY OPINION ON THE
> >> > SMALLER 7pm NIGHTLY MEETINGS, IS NOT AT ALL THE SAME.
>
> >> >> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Scott F <clydes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Hi to everybody,
> >> >> > Some are trying to reformat meetings and GA facilitator of it.
> >> >> > I think the only way to maintain some semblence of order is to follow
> >> >> > the original method. And, meetings can be a little "looser" in
> >> >> > structure. Looser worked better at the meeting I facilitated on
> >> >> > Tuesday. Also be wary of proposals that are "too large of question"
> >> >> > posed to the smaller grroup. Big decisions need to be up to the GA.
> >> >> > Meetings are great for passing along commettee info.
> >> >> > Good luck, Facilitating is very cool.

[Gabriel Laszlo]

I think we all need to practice patience. Perhaps I'm just not a good
example of what you're talking about? Remember, OWS started on
September 17, 2011. I think it's all moving along at a nice clip. In
the beginning I thought that it would just be me occupying in Lake
Worth! I can certainly see what you're talking about though, I think
we're like water and that we'll find our level.

-g

[Bryan Silber]

Not without demands. Not without a program. This opportunity will not last
forever.

[Gabriel Laszlo]

Where is OUR Thomas Paine!?!

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

I sat in on one facilitation meeting "they" had at Flagler park & was
ostracized from that day forward for not knowing the rules of
consensus. (yet "they" never tried telling me those rules) I have
since researched them on my own. I signed up for the that facilitation
committee & have not been invited to any of their "private" meetings.
I was told that we on that committee would have a google forum to stay
in touch with each other. When I received a forum notice from them, I
was told it was by accident & not to send them any emails & that I was
not even supposed to have there email addresses!!!!! "They" seem to
have already formed all "their" committees without us. I personally
collected many names that day & offered many people a chance to be on
a committee. None of those people have been contacted. I was told AT
THAT MEETING that all the committees had already been formed???? I
said how can that be when I just signed up all these people. Elise
took those lists & none of us has seen them since. They should be made
available to all of us!!!

On Oct 30, 9:07 pm, sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net wrote:
> Thanks John, you kinda made my point, when people like myself have come forward to do things, we get no reply,  or it seems people have established some power base and "volunteer" to do all the work. Thus creating more power. I am on the facilitator committee ,  there was supposed to be a list? What the fuck happened to it? Elise wanted to handle it so bad, now where is the work. She blames another and so on. Yet I get called to "confrontational". To friggan bad. If your reading this and your a facilitator, where's the fuckin faciitator contact list??

> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Tracey <jtrace...@gmail.com>
>
> Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 20:55:06

> To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> Reply-To: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Meetings
>

> The facilitators have arisen out of necessity. Anyone who wants to take on
> the thankless job of answering 68 emails a day, and finding themselves
> deadlocked on trying to institute anything, is more than free to volunteer.
> There are no back room dealings here, every decision we've made has been,
> whenever possible, made at the campsite in full view and with full
> participation from anyone willing to be there. Rachel has three people on
> supplies, Roberto has a few on outreach, I have 15-20 on media, from web
> designers, to facebook admin, to youtube, to contacts/mailing lists... I'm
> glad to be working now, but I'm 10 hours a day, 6 days a week, and don't
> really have time to mediate debates like this. Whatever facilitation goes
> with, I'm comfortable with. They're the ones who determine format for GA
> and other meetings, so if you're interested in guiding that process, hit
> them up. The format on Saturday worked better than ever before, thanks to
> the feedback from Sheryl and others. When the meeting isn't going well, in
> my opinion, I go set up tents and sweep for litter.
>
> Bottom line, we're all in this together, no-one has made a dime yet, and
> we're inexperienced in activism for the most part. That's what gives us our
> power, I think. We aren't the typical activists that people are used to
> seeing protest. We're people just like them, who work, and vote, but
> usually don't get involved, camping out across the country and flooding our
> facebook pages. We've done the best we can with improvised and make shift
> solutions. If you have a problem with any committee, join it. If you take
> issue with the leader, commit to taking on the yoke first, and if you have
> a suggestion for something else we could be doing, please, volunteer. My
> plate is full, and I'm still not getting done everything I'd like to see
> done.

[Steve Ellman]

What's going on, people? We seem to have lost momentum.

Needs:

-demands
-outreach
-an end to squabbling over consensus procedure

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

I do not think John was suggesting we accommodate those who just speak
endlessly without thinking. Just those who would otherwise be
accommodated by the "Americans with Disabilities Act", which was
created by the people, for the people. It is illegal & just plain
wrong, not accommodate these people, which would make us no better
than the 1%.

On Oct 30, 9:09 pm, sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net wrote:
> That's beautiful John, but in the meen time GA's are falling apart. How do you suggest we salvage that and accommodate people who just speak endlessly without thinking?

> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Tracey <jtrace...@gmail.com>
>
> Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:00:29

> To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> Reply-To: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Meetings
>

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

IMO, this decline is proof that those who would want to destroy us are
hard at work & succeeding!!!

On Oct 30, 9:15 pm, clydes...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Steve, 35 is a very small turnout, we had hundreds at previous GA's. I think the local movement cannot wait to act on this decline in participation.

> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Ellman <steven.ell...@gmail.com>
>
> Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:11:47

> To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> Reply-To: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Meetings
>

> This may be the kind of thing that just has to sort itself out over time.
> As John (I think it was) pointed out, last Sat's GA, small though it was
> (about 35 of us) went very smoothly.
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:09 PM, <sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net> wrote:
>

> > ** That's beautiful John, but in the meen time GA's are falling apart.

> > How do you suggest we salvage that and accommodate people who just speak
> > endlessly without thinking?
>
> > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

> > ------------------------------
> > *From: * John Tracey <jtrace...@gmail.com>
> > *Sender: * occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> > *Date: *Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:00:29 -0400
> > *To: *<occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> > *ReplyTo: * occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> > *Subject: *Re: Meetings

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

How would you propose we end the squabbling over the consensus
procedure?
Seems only those who want to keep it are left!!! Those who hate it
have already quit & will never return as a direct result of this
procedure. Seem if we want to fail completely this is the way to
go!!!! Maybe that is the intention!!! We are shrinking, not growing.
Do we need further proof!!!

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

sfr.... I have seen you facilitate meetings where YOU would not
STFU!!!!!

On Oct 30, 9:48 pm, sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net wrote:
> I think you have personally watched me facilitate when some just won't quit(stfu). Any suggestions? I have tried pacifist and just walking away, and the group just let's them continue. I have tried actively asking them to check themselves, and they claim free speech. It definitely is an exorcise is patience!

> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Ellman <steven.ell...@gmail.com>
>
> Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:43:02

> To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> Reply-To: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Meetings
>

> We need to keep order at meetings, mos def.
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:32 PM, <clydes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ** I think we want the same result, yet neither of us are able to
> > convince each other which idea works.
>
> > I am down with change, but I think the biggest problem has been a few that
> > are rude and won't STFU. Seriously, I think that is killing us locally

>
> > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
> > ------------------------------

> > *From: * Steve Ellman <steven.ell...@gmail.com>
> > *Sender: * occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> > *Date: *Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:27:31 -0400

> > *To: *<occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> > *ReplyTo: * occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> > *Subject: *Re: Meetings
>

> > No one proclaims it. The co-ordinating committee or advisory committee or
> > whatever it's called arises spontaneously, through self-selection. Those
> > who show up and make it work, make it happen. And if they really make it
> > happen, it's accepted/modified by the larger GA. And as the GA's prove
> > their effectiveness and do outreach, the GA's grow.
> > We need an effective organizational core.
>
> > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:23 PM, <sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net> wrote:
>
> >> ** Yes, but how do we proclaim "leaderless" then? My personal gut
> >> feeling is some kind of "steering committee be formally announced,(not the
> >> same group that we attended, totally new). It will be recognized as such,
> >> and start there. I am no longer interested in participating in that group.
> >> The very small group of steering member wannabee's can lobby for themselves
> >> at 7p meetings during the week and then vote of some sort may occur at a GA.

>
> >> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
> >> ------------------------------

> >> *From: * Steve Ellman <steven.ell...@gmail.com>
> >> *Sender: * occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> >> *Date: *Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:17:05 -0400

> >> *To: *<occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> >> *ReplyTo: * occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> >> *Subject: *Re: Meetings
>

> >> I think we need to build an effective core on which to grow. A couple of
> >> hundred people venting won't accomplish anything.
>
> >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:15 PM, <clydes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> ** Hi Steve, 35 is a very small turnout, we had hundreds at previous

> >>> GA's. I think the local movement cannot wait to act on this decline in
> >>> participation.
>
> >>> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

> >>> ------------------------------
> >>> *From: * Steve Ellman <steven.ell...@gmail.com>
> >>> *Sender: * occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> >>> *Date: *Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:11:47 -0400

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

@ Steve, That is also what I have suggested but no one will
listen!!!
It is so simple, yet many seem to want it complicated!!!

8-12 noon = open mic.. for all to shout their outrage & concerns!!!

12 noon = Pep rally & march!!!! Roberto has offered to head this
feature & no one has disagreed that he would be perfect!!!!

3pm General Assembly.... can go on indefinitely!!!!

Each person can show up for the part/s they are interested in!!!!

NO-ONE is left out or unheard!!!!!

We need to stop losing people with such strict controls over
EVERYTHING!!!

This would loosen things up & make EVERYONE FEEL WELCOME!!!!!

I am open to modification in order to make things work!!!

Again take notice that I talk about solutions!!! Not problems!!!!!



On Oct 30, 9:51 pm, Steve Ellman <steven.ell...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wish I had an easy answer. Perhaps we should set up a free speech zone at
> every GA, separate from the GA itself, and tell those who want to sound off
> to go sound off there and leave the rest of us to the work.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:48 PM, <sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net> wrote:
> > ** I think you have personally watched me facilitate when some just won't

> > quit(stfu). Any suggestions? I have tried pacifist and just walking away,
> > and the group just let's them continue. I have tried actively asking them
> > to check themselves, and they claim free speech. It definitely is an
> > exorcise is patience!
>
> > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

> > ------------------------------
> > *From: * Steve Ellman <steven.ell...@gmail.com>
> > *Sender: * occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

> > *Date: *Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:43:02 -0400

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

@ clydes The afore mentioned are not diseases, they are disorders. The
huge difference between an alcoholic disease and a disorder is that,
the drunk person can come to the meeting sober!!!! Those with a
developmental disorders cannot change how their brain works!!! This
does not mean they have no value!!! You may be surprised as to what
they have to offer. You may be surprised as to what you can learn from
them. Would you expect a person in a wheelchair to get up & walk, just
because you explained how??? We all can learn something from each
other.

On a personal note: People on the autistic spectrum do very well with
"defined" rules & structure, if the rules stayed the same from moment
to moment & person to person!!!! Autistic's who have learned the rules
tend to be the ones who point out those who do not follow the
rules!!!! I was never told the rules yet was expected to follow
them!!! I cannot help but notice that EVERYONE interrupts &/or breaks
the rules from time to time yet, I am the only one who is criticized
for it. @Scott .. I have seen you interrupt many people a break many
of the procedure rules!!! I have seen nearly every facilitator do the
same, as well!!!!!

On Oct 30, 11:12 pm, clydes...@gmail.com wrote:
> I will leave the conversation with this thought, An alcoholic is at a meeting, and because of his disease, he is drunk at disruptive to the progress of the assembly. And he does it again week after week. How would we deal with this as facilitators? To me it is no different then the afore mentioned disease's.  Just food for thought, Good Night and Sleep dry Occupy'ers
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gabriel Laszlo <gabeisthen...@gmail.com>
>
> Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 22:58:35
> To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> Reply-To: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Meetings
>
> I don't speak up very often but I feel I would be remiss if I didn't
> point out that we need to be cautious of ego-traps, whatever is
> decided.
>
> g
>

> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 10:18 PM,  <clydes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > John, you still haven't given a suggestion on the declining attendance at
> > GA's, yet you are happy to tell me how you would do things. That's happy
> > talk with no solution, do the inmates run this asylum?
>
> > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> > ________________________________

> > From: John Tracey <jtrace...@gmail.com>

> > Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> > Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 22:09:42 -0400
> > To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>
> > ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com
> > Subject: Re: Meetings
> > I have the same frustrations. I have the same goals. I spend most of my time
> > listening, and when I have something to say, I say it. When I notice that my
> > ego is hindering the process, I humble myself, and help with tents.
>
> > My ego is the only part of this movement I control. I suggest everyone focus
> > on that, as well. We have members with autism/OCD/Aspergers, and various
> > other different abilities, and sometimes not being able to speak in turn is
> > not their fault. Me debasing rather than embracing them is. "STFU" is pretty
> > severe when you're talking to someone who doesn't understand why they are
> > being told to. I put my energy where I can make the most difference, which
> > happens to be in how I conduct myself.
>
> > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 10:01 PM, <sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net> wrote:
>
> >> That's another frustration, the persons fighting to distribute the list
> >> dropped the ball. Jus sayin
>
> >> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> >> ________________________________

> >> From: John Tracey <jtrace...@gmail.com>

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

@Sarah ... I think you are wonderful... but... this idea is very
limiting!! It seems to me that many people would not get to say what
they feel & I cannot support that which does not give everyone an
equal voice!!!!

On Oct 31, 1:06 am, Sarah <pila...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Steve Ellman]

The difficulty of the consensus is a good way to weed out who's serious about building a strong base.

[Snyder, Sheryl & Brandon]

@ David Hodges
EXCELLENT!!!! WELL SAID!!!! WE NEED MORE OF YOU!!!!

[Clementine Lazar]

I believe that much of the success of Saturday's meeting was due to having a thought-out, set agenda written out and visible to everyone who entered the space, and (more or less) sticking to that agenda throughout the meeting. I haven't been to any of "their" facilitation meetings either, and I'm not even sure they're happening, as it seems like things are mostly being organized on the fly by the folks who happen to be around. What I do know is that even minimal structure goes a VERY, VERY long way in making things run smoothly (no matter what decision making process is used), and I think Saturday's meeting should be taken as evidence of that.

 

So, that's my two cents. No matter whether we stick with consensus or not, I really, really believe that we need to be planning and writing out agendas for our large group meetings, and that doing so is the key to keeping people involved.

 

Clementine

 

PS: I think some of the folks talking about consensus (myself included) haven't spent enough time explaining one of its central points: Consensus is a way of making decisions, not a way of running a meeting. Meetings can include brainstorms, open discussions, go-arounds, idea mapping, and any number of other less structured ways of talking in a big group. It's only when decisions need to be made, and proposals are prepared, that the consensus process needs to kick in. I'm wondering if more space were made available in our meetings for this kind of free and open discussion, or if proposals were debated and discussed in working groups and then brought to the GA, if folks would feel more comfortable with the consensus process being used to make final big decisions. I know that consensus can feel cumbersome and time-consuming, and it often is. But we don't have to run our meetings going through the consensus process and nothing else....there's all kinds of way to talk about issues, and consensus is a way of making sure everyone is heard when it comes down to finally making a decision.

[Steve Ellman]

Clementine offers much good food for thought.
I propose the co-ordinating committee (or advisory committee, whatever we want to call it) meet in advance of Saturday's GA to plan for the GA. ASAP, in fact, Wednesday, preferably, Thursday at the latest.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Hi Steve, if you recall, this idea was attempted once, and it wasn't very productive. Try to invite less people.....and people with a proven record of doing the work. I discovered more are willing to talk and take work, and then under achieve. This fact has frustrated me to removing myself to watch. I would suggest almost all new faces. You are on the right track with your ideas. Peace

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 10:55:53 -0400

To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: Meetings

[Jody Young]

I was one of the original 19, helped on GA 2&3, signed up for a committee and was NEVER contacted either.....have been down to Flagler a few times but not really feeling the love....having to work and family limits my time but I feel as if an opportunity is being wasted.  Just my humble opinion.  I'll help when and where I can, nationally this movement is a force, locally thus far, not so much.

J.Y.

[Steve Ellman]

I think we all hear Jody's complaint. Hard to get this organized when we're doing it from scratch, and without any outside or top down direction.

[Gabriel Laszlo]

I can certainly understand people's frustration and frankly I don't
have a solution. I think Christian may have been our best shot at
having a "leader." But I can understand his frustration with us. Did
we EVER reach a consensus about anything!?! How can we ever move
forward when we have to deal with a 1,000 people who are all convinced
they're special and that they have the best idea!?! This will eat at
the movement's resolve and we will ultimately fulfill our detractor's
predictions.

-- g

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Gabriel, I hope you don't consider me a detractor. I ask hard questions as I see it. Apparently, there is some truth to my questions.
Understand this, there are backroom meetings to "steer" this local movement. They go unreported, or no details emerge, just bits and pieces.
No doubt many have outstanding character and dedication, but will not stand up for fear of being "banished" from the small insider group.
Has the occupation grown or shrunk?
This is the barometer.
My suggestions have been noted, by many that disagree, yet they continue to participate in the local movements downward movement.
Why?
Many reasons, you probably know already.
Meeting/GA's....
Boring, and uneventful. People want to march and protest and scream at the 1%. That is not happening unless the marches move to Palm Beach Island.
The rest......
Did some wealthy palm beacher call the mayor and make promises of cash for future campaigns to put the occupyers in the present location.....Things that make ya go hmmmmm.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----

From: Gabriel Laszlo <gabeis...@gmail.com>
Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

[Jody Young]

off-topic for a moment, not sure if everyone is aware there is a rally near the occupy site today for Awake the State, a progressive and union led effort to fight the policies and tenure of Rick Scott, 4:30 at the fountains.

JY

[Bryan Silber]

Consensus is the fundamental problem. It is the creation of known anarchist
wrecker Peter Gelderloos. Why have you accepted what is essentially minority
rules.

http://www.amazon.com/Consensus-Handbook-Grassroots-Political-Environmental/
dp/1884365396/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1320171840&sr=8-3

Return to the American system of majority rules with the speech of the
minority protected.

Time for demands!

1. Tax all financial transactions at 1%
2. Stop foreclosures
3. Student loan amnesty
4. Nationalize the Federal Reserve
5. 30 million jobs at union wages

Let's go! The clock is ticking!

B

[Jody Young]

I know the Mayor and I doubt that to be the case.  I'd suggest asking her office to procure a gas powered light tower that can also be used for electricity, it has outlets.  Play the safety card. Promise to turn it off by 11pm.  Solicit donations for the fuel.  If the city won't supply it, move back to Flagler Park. 

[Steve Ellman]

I agree that we need to move toward more high-profile (peaceful, non-violent) actions. But let's not go all conspiracist on this.
The "backroom" meetings aren't hidden from anyone and I think it's a bit paranoid to suggest that the Mayor was bought off.
The problem is simply what it appears to be: It is very difficult to organize a true grassroots campaign and organization. Let's stay the course and build on a sound foundation.

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:24 PM, <clyd...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Gabriel Laszlo]

To address the issues that have been raised. I can only say that any
nefarious goings on are beyond my "range of sight" and there's not a
curtain nor a wizard. I certainly didn't mean to accuse anyone of
anything. The other POI from JY while I certainly support labor and
labor unions my only concern would be that any political ties or
overtones rise to prominence.

g

[Jody Young]

No matter the political parties involved, Rick Scott is a big part of the problem in this state; I understand the concern, but by attending one need not swap spit or blood with political partisans... I for one will try to steer the attendees over to the camp post rally if they've not yet been....

jy

[Steve Ellman]

If rank and file labor aren't our allies, no one is.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Know your enemy.......
And
If back room meetings are being held, without inviting anybody, what else should they be called.
My point about the mayor is not bribery, it is to snap people into thinking how things that happen without explanation usually have an explanation.
Believing the enemy is the first step to defeat.
Non violent and peaceful? Disagree in your verbage, we need to be LOUD, ANGRY and law abiding.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 14:45:34 -0400

To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

Great idea, and I think unions need to be asked to join the local Occupy Movement.
Leaderless, A-political, non partisan, No demands, no goals........
What is this about again????

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Jody Young <csc...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 14:54:50 -0400

To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: Meetings

[sfr...@tmo.blackberry.net]

Spot on Steve

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 14:55:59 -0400

To: <occupypalm...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: Meetings

[Gabriel Laszlo]

Thank you jy and thank you for the "heads-up" I will certainly try to be there.

g

[Steve Ellman]

--Someone has to start the organizational process. But the starters don't dictate to the larger body.
--The Mayor may have her reasons. But the fact is we have an unmolested occupation site. It's up to us what we do with it.
--Peaceful doesn't mean quiet. But I don't see what anger gains us.

[Gabriel Laszlo]

I'm guessing that this is Scott.

LOUD and ANGRY was only useful in revolutionary Russia and US, and if
you believe that either of those undertakings were rapidly were gone
after then I think you have either (1.) been misinformed or (2.) have
a poor understanding of history. Hoffman failed.

-- g

[clyd...@gmail.com]

I am referring to the marches I was actually alive for, and watched at arms length. End the War in Viet Nam. I was a part of history, and it was angry(especially after kent state).
Do you think the 1% are gonna change or give up anything with out a fight? Come on man....
I didn't say illegal, I said angry and Loud.
And,
A revolution of sorts is exactly what we are calling for. A financial Revolution, A Social Revolution.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Steve, have you ever heard of "respect through fear" ?? Nobody fears loud, we as a society are comfortable with noise, fear is a whole other story...

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Steve Ellman <steven...@gmail.com>

Sender: occupypalm...@googlegroups.com

Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:05:20 -0400

[Gabriel Laszlo]

I wasn't around then either for either of those revolutions and I was
3 years old when the "police action" ended in SE Asia. But I believe
that the work of Gandhi and MLK have changed the nature of
"revolution" and that we should function within the foundations they
built. I think peaceful protest of the many is a lot more effective
than the throwing of Molotov cocktails by the few.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

Molotov Cocktails?? I give up

[Gabriel Laszlo]

Well, that sounds like what you're clamoring for.

[Steve Ellman]

Anger and fear are not the ticket.

[clyd...@gmail.com]

It might to somebody that is young and idealistic.

Nowhere did I write "illegal".

Fear and respect can be gained numerous ways without violence.

Think about it

[Steve Ellman]

It is not our purpose to make the 1% fear us. Our purpose is to win over the 99% to our side, to wake them up.