Re: Draft - Action Interest Poll

[Esteban Gil]

food not bombs is already an organization.  IT's been around for years.  they serve food without permits, google it.

maybe we can do some colaboration?
-e

On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Paul Jenvey <paul....@gmail.com> wrote:

Here's what I have so far...  Ideas?  Criticism?  Amendments?  I'd liek to get it out electronically soon, so that we can also have printed copies at the next two GA's

[Pablo Oliva]

The only other action that I can remember is "occupying foreclosures."

Was the intent to use something like http://www.surveymonkey.com/ or were we just gonna do it old school?

[Pablo Oliva]

Once the doc is finalized I can help you set it up on SurveyMonkey.

On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Paul Jenvey <paul....@gmail.com> wrote:

I have no survey-monkeying experience.  Can we create a ranked poll in that platform?  If so, I'd be game to do it, as long as we can also add the paper polls we get from GA involved.  If not, I'm OK with old school hand tallying

[Pablo Oliva]

And yes, we can add paper entries. BUT, maybe it's a better idea to have people who attend the GA to cast their votes. Would it be too easy for someone who hasn't really been participating to cast their "vote" online and then continue not participating? Or should we add the convenience? Maybe using SurveyMonkey will just make it more complicated. The whole idea was to have those who intend on participating vote on what actions would motivate them to action, and maybe our concern should start with those who actually are already active, those attending GA's. Do my concerns/ideas make sense? Thoughts?

[Carrie Arnold]

Is there a password protected survey perhaps?

Or maybe paper is the way to go - if you want your voice heard you have to be at the GA? Maybe we could do them 2 weeks in a row as well as at the action meeting?

On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Paul Jenvey <paul....@gmail.com> wrote:

I have been thinking about it too - I mean, on one hand, we are an all inclusive body and I would not want to exclude anyone who has an intention to take part - and on the other hand, we shouldn't be directed by whatever trolls crawl out of the internet...


what does everyone else think about it?

[Jeff Rudisill]

In this case, it seems the bigger the net we cast the better. This is equivalent to brainstorming, not to voting. I think any contributions by "trolls" would be filtered out by the consensus process when we  decide what actions to take. I can see both Survey Monkey and paper at GA working. I've used Survey Monkey and find it an effective tool.

Jeff R

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Paul Jenvey <paul....@gmail.com> wrote:

I like that - 2 weeks, 2 GA's, 2 action meetings, or get them to the
action meeting some other way (call, arrange, meet somebody).

Open enough to let people get involved, closed enough to keep the
world from deciding our action poll for us.

[Jeff Rudisill]

PS - I submit this as an inactive member of the Action Committee, and defer to those who are doing the work.

Jeff