Your words are meaningless in the face of your (in)actions

[Kate Lamothe]

Dani,

 

I want to preface this e-mail by saying that I debated long and hard with myself about whether to send this to you privately or make it public.  After much thought, I've decided that you need to be publicly called out for your actions and inactions. I feel as though I have reached a point where all other avenues have been exhausted.  To me, this weekend demonstrated exactly where your political priorities are: WITH YOURSELF. You said it best during the cop workshop that you're open to other people joining YOUR cause but that you're not interested in building coalitions. 

 

What I saw over the past week of film nights and forum festivities was someone who took up the most space in meetings (ie: you) doing the least amount of work (ie: attending as a participant).  I thought that was bad enough, but then when I woke up yesterday and saw that you had asked me to schedule the forum community debrief on your terms (ie: vacation days) I decided I had had enough.  In my opinion, you have absolutely no right whatsoever to expect the forum or collective to consider your needs or listen to your words, because honestly you have not considered or listened to ours. In fact, I believe you have actually done the exact opposite of consider the collective's needs: you have been a detrimental force to this collective and it needs to stop!

 

Just so it's clear, here are some examples of, in my opinion, the detrimental behaviour I've witnessed you exhibit:

 

1) During meetings, while other people were talking, and especially when I was talking, you interupted almost every sentence with either "mmmhm," or big huffs&puffs&groans&moans.  Even after you were asked NOT to do this you continued. This is very disruptive behaviour as it doesn't give folks, especially shyer/quieter folks, the sense that they really have the space to speak. To me, by doing that non-word vocal communication, you're attempting to recentre yourself, and that is fucked up (re: it's not all about YOU)

 

2) You took on task after task that never got completed. Almost every single meeting (with a couple exceptions) started with you admitting that you hadn't done the tasks that you had committed to.  Sometimes you even took on the same task two or three meetings in a row, only for them to not get done.  What I saw in the end was that so much of the collective was left scrambling at the last minute (ie: figuring out billeting locations, booking portapotties) because you flaked on all your duties. 

 

3) During the police strategizing workshop, your behaviour drove folks to leave.  I am not making assumptions here, people told me explicitly that they left because of you. 

 

4)  During Shannon's keynote, you responded in a very defensive manner to the critiques offered by folks about there not being enough trans people of colour/indigenous trans folk representation. One woman even rephrased her comment so as to direct it at you.  I believe she said something like "Some organizers are listening, being brought to tears over this pain, while others are simply not getting it!"  Trust me, a lot of us got who she was saying that to (re: YOU)

 

 

And, to me, these last two points are the most important because I truly believe that you have silenced voices and driven people away from organizing with us...and it has to stop! I have absolutely no faith in your ability to change, like you said during the workshop "I have 50 years of male socialization and because of that I like to get things done."  To me, these are not the words of collective organizing. Further they are extremely patriarchal & misogynistic and I do not want that shit poisoning a collective I'm involved with!  I refuse to continue in the silencing of many voices just so yours can be heard!

 

So, I am going to organize the community debrief during the time you are away.  If you decide to change your vacation plans to try to attend it, know in advance that I and a number of other members will simply walk out the second you walk in.  I have faith that the community members who attended the forum will know who did the work and who didn't, and support our decision in this. 

 

Honestly, the time has long passed for niceties.

 

I will not let one person's words overshadow the hours upon hours of WORK that was done by other, more reliable people!

 

I truely hope for your sake that you are able to work on your own internalized bullshit in counselling/therapy or wherever else, just please stop draining the energy of this collective!  This is organizing for social justice, not group therapy!

 

In my opinion, you are no longer welcome in this collective!  I mean, you said it yourself on thursday of last week, you wanted to be taken off the mailing list so please, don't let the door hit you on the way out!

 

Bye,

Kate

[romham]

definitely some powerful words.
i wanted to put out there to the collective...i wonder, are you all ok
with folks such as myself (volunteers in some capacity but not on the
collective) being on this list? If there's stuff yall need space to
work through and dont wish for others to be here while you do that, im
just saying that im totally ok if you would like me to leave.

i hope you're all able to come to a place where you can work together
--or not-- but some common ground for your hearts and energies. some
moving through it.

im so proud of you folks for everything youve done, the vision, the
time, energy, resources youve put into things; for challenging
yourselves when there was stuff you didnt get or agree with; for
understanding and hearing people when they said it just wasnt enough
or didnt include them. theres so much to learn. so many better ways to
do things. there are always mistakes or places where we dont fully
appreciate the details or nuances, where privileges and long
entrenched patterns allow us to skim over this or that. i know that
shit can change.
i value what happened here, all of it.

onwards and upwards, folks

xox


romham

On Jul 27, 5:44 am, Kate Lamothe <kathleen.p.lamo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dani,
>
> I want to preface this e-mail by saying that I debated long and hard with
> myself about whether to send this to you privately or make it public.  After
> much thought, I've decided that you need to be publicly called out for your
> actions and inactions. I feel as though I have reached a point where all
> other avenues have been exhausted.  To me, this weekend demonstrated exactly
> where your political priorities are: WITH YOURSELF. You said it best during
> the cop workshop that you're open to other people joining YOUR cause but
> that you're not interested in building coalitions.
>
> What I saw over the past week of film nights and forum festivities was
> someone who took up the most space in meetings (ie: you) doing the least
> amount of work (ie: attending as a participant).  I thought that was bad
> enough, but then when I woke up yesterday and saw that you had asked me to
> schedule the forum community debrief on your terms (ie: vacation days) I
> decided I had had enough.  In my opinion, you have absolutely no right
> whatsoever to expect the forum or collective to consider your needs or
> listen to your words, because honestly you have not considered or listened
> to ours. In fact, I believe you have actually done the exact opposite of

> consider the collective's needs: *you have been a detrimental force to
> this collective and it needs to stop!*
> **

> Just so it's clear, here are some examples of, in my opinion, the
> detrimental behaviour I've witnessed you exhibit:
>

> 1) During meetings, while other people were talking, *and especially when I
> was talking*, you interupted almost every sentence with either "mmmhm," or

> big huffs&puffs&groans&moans.  Even after you were asked NOT to do this you
> continued. This is very disruptive behaviour as it doesn't give folks,
> especially shyer/quieter folks, the sense that they really have the space to
> speak. To me, by doing that non-word vocal communication, you're attempting
> to recentre yourself, and that is fucked up (re: it's not all about YOU)
>
> 2) You took on task after task that never got completed. Almost every single
> meeting (with a couple exceptions) started with you admitting that you
> hadn't done the tasks that you had committed to.  Sometimes you even took on
> the same task two or three meetings in a row, only for them to not get
> done.  What I saw in the end was that so much of the collective was left
> scrambling at the last minute (ie: figuring out billeting locations, booking
> portapotties) because you flaked on all your duties.
>
> 3) During the police strategizing workshop, your behaviour drove folks to
> leave.  I am not making assumptions here, people told me explicitly
> that they left because of you.
>
> 4)  During Shannon's keynote, you responded in a very defensive manner to
> the critiques offered by folks about there not being enough trans people of
> colour/indigenous trans folk representation. One woman even rephrased her
> comment so as to direct it at you.  I believe she said something like "Some
> organizers are listening, being brought to tears over this pain, while
> others are simply not getting it!"  Trust me, a lot of us got who she was
> saying that to (re: YOU)
>
> And, to me, these last two points are the most important because I truly
> believe that you have silenced voices and driven people away from organizing

> with us...*and it has to stop! *I have absolutely no faith in your ability

> to change, like you said during the workshop "I have 50 years of male
> socialization and because of that I like to get things done."  To me, these
> are not the words of collective organizing. Further they are extremely
> patriarchal & misogynistic and I do not want that shit poisoning a
> collective I'm involved with!  I refuse to continue in the silencing of many
> voices just so yours can be heard!
>

> So, I *am* going to organize the community debrief during the time you are

> away.  If you decide to change your vacation plans to try to attend it, know
> in advance that I and a number of other members will simply walk out the
> second you walk in.  I have faith that the community members who attended
> the forum will know who did the work and who didn't, and support our
> decision in this.
>

> *Honestly, the time has long passed for niceties.*

[hunter cubitt-cooke]

Dani,
I too debated sending you this privately or publicly. I sent you an email privately before. I tried to be as supportive, forgiving, and understanding as possible in that last email I sent you. all the concerns i brought to you were immediatly repeated. I just feel at this point I cannot operate under good faith with you. I have absolutely no trust in you. Your behavior is consistently inappropriate and down right oppressive.
I am writing you publicly because I feel you cannot participate in this group anymore. It is not just kate who feels that way.
I feel you have little to no respect of boundaries. Your selfishness has been a destructive force in this group time and time again.
It is not ok that you didnt respond to my email asking for your information for billeters you said you would host and then for you to reply in essay format about the stuff going on with the march. this is but one of many many clear examples i feel illustrate the fact that you do not want to work, you only want to boss people around.
It is not ok to completely bail on all your responsibilities for the forum and then just show up to a workshop. what a coincidence it was the workshop kate was facilitating and one where you have alot of opinions you want heard. I cant imagine you would have showed up to work the door on a workshop you didnt want to attend, or that you might have showed up to be of help at any point at all.
There were a number of things i had conflict with, that i didnt agree with, but not once did i consider abandoning my duties because of that.
I worked my ass off. I poured everything i had into the forum. I only spoke twice in the workshop you attended. once i had to ask you again (3rd or 4th time) not to huff and puff and moan and hiss and mhmm mhmmm while people were talking. at which point you cut me off and yelled at me. saying i should do the same. i have repeatedly asked you not to communicate like that. i wish i didnt have to keep telling you the rules over and over, but i shouldnt have to be yelled at for reminding you again. you repeatedly cut people off, spoke over them, had to be asked to remember the speakers list. this wasnt just this workshop, its over and over.  i've seen you silence people over and over with that behavior. the other time i tried to speak i was disclosing being brutalized by the police and being gay bashed and talking about a feeling of hopelessness. while i was trying to talk you kept scoffing at me untill you could take over speaking. then you just started giving orders. we will do this. it will be like this. this is the way to do this.  you do not know where Im coming from. you do not know the violence i have experienced. the fact that you feel you can shut me down while Im trying to express my feelings at the forum is outrageous.

I repeatedly felt like you were trying to dominate me in a way that had sexual undertones in meetings. not ok. do not make flirtatious comments and sexual references to people in meeting settings, in group situations. it makes it ackward to say no. I have never shown you any interest or given you any permission to act like that. even if youre just joking around, you are still playing games with power.

the one meeting kate did not attend you used as an opportunity to make fun of her and put her down. this among countless other examples is why i think you have a very unhealthy relationship to power.

Your energy is detrimental, and not welcome. this is not because i disagree with you politically. there are people i do not agree with politically in the group who i respect and want to work with.

the fact that you dont even seem to want to hear what people have to say is the deciding factor for me. wether its an indigenous person being brave enough to speak up like she did, or whatever. you dont seem to care about anything or anyone but yourself.
please, just leave us alone.
hunter.

[Gwen]

Thanks Hunter. I appreciate very much you explaining your position,
articulately and most important, respectfully. That means a great
deal to me. I also appreciate Kate's posting for bringing into the
open, something she obviously felt very strongly about. Unfortunately
I found the angry tone, and some of the language in her posting very
disturbing. It frightened me, and to be honest, I wasn't totally sure
it was safe to speak out any longer. I've explained my concerns to
Kate in an email, which she is free to publish if she thinks it is
important. I didn't make it public, because at the time, I felt it
would add fuel to flames, and would divide us further, One thing I
would like to repeat from that email however, is belief that Dani's
expulsion from the collective cannot be decided by single person, or
even a group of persons. I know this may make some people very
uncomfortable but consensus has been our approach so far and I think
the opportunity to block Dani's removal is something members of the
collective are entitled to. I also realize that members like Kate and
Hunter who feel very strongly about this, may prefer the de facto
dissolution of the collective, if consensus on Dani cannot be
reached. I can only plead with all my heart that they not do that.
We made it through the debate on the march which, at least for me, was
equally serious, without anyone walking away or the collective
breaking. I think we can do the same here. I would be greatly
disappointed if we didn't at least try. We are divided. If I had any
doubts of that, they were completely dispelled last night during the
TAS meeting, where I watched people, all of whom are friends, rip each
other apart. It was extremely disturbing. If this continues, it
will, in my opinion, leave divisions which will last a very long time,
and that is something our community can ill afford. Whereas I
initially feared fanning the flames of our disagreements, I think the
blaze is now out of control, and the only options either are to wade
directly into it and attempt to smother it, or let it burn everything
to ashes and walk away.

On Jul 29, 9:56 am, hunter cubitt-cooke <hunter.c.co...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Corey Keith]

I want to thank you Gwen for saying those words.  I am really getting the sense that we are really getting to a really dangerous point.  I was not at the TAS meeting, nor was I at the meeting regarding the police issue.  however, the sense is that we are heading down a dangerous road.  a road that can fracture our community and I don't think that is what anyone of us want.   on the other hand we need to figure these pieces out, as soon as we can.  it has been proposed that we meet on the 15th of July, I believe this is a good date for us to meet and a good place to start.  I will find a way to be there at this meeting and I offer my facilitating skills.   If this is kewl, i would like to have another person to support me in this task that can be a neutral party.

As Gwen has mentioned that we have done everything by consensus, then that is how we must manage this.  I believe that everyone has good intentions.  I am not saying that any discriminatory or oppressive behavior from any member should be taken lightly or ignored but must be taken appropriately and were all parties have an opportunity to have a voice.

i am really proud of the work we have done, and I would be saddened, angered, and hurt if this is how we went down.  All of us are better than this.  I saw it at the forum, and I would like to see this again.

Namaste, Corey

There is not enough darkness in all the world to put out the light of even one small candle.

 ~Robert Alden

"Infinite Diversity, in Infinite Combinations"

-Gene Roddenberry (Credo)

> Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:37:35 -0700
> Subject: Re: Your words are meaningless in the face of your (in)actions
> From: gwennet...@gmail.com
> To: vancouver-...@googlegroups.com

[Gwenneth Athena Katsaris]

i'm assuming you mean Aug 15 ... unless you have a time machine tucked away somewhere ;)  .... 15th is ok with me

[Corey Keith]

LOL, thanks Gwen for correcting me...LOL.  Although a time Machine would be nice.

 

Namaste,

Corey

There is not enough darkness in all the world to put out the light of even one small candle.

 ~Robert Alden

"Infinite Diversity, in Infinite Combinations"

-Gene Roddenberry (Credo)

---

Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:35:49 -0700

[marie.little]

A Tardis would be even better! Although I think I would prefer one in pink to one in blue - but that's just me.

As for the 15th, as far as I know that's good. The reason for my uncertainty is that after my last doctor's appointment, it appears that inflamed cartilage may not be the ultimate (or only) source of the problem so a series of tests and appointments with neurologists is in the works and I selfishly am going to give priority to trying to find out what's going on with my body.

Having gone from 'student activist' to 'labour activist' to 'trans activist', I would sort of like to postpone becoming a 'differently abled activist' if I can.

In solidarity,

Marie

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3034 - Release Date: 07/28/10 23:34:00

[Shannon Blatt]

I am acknowledging that I heard Hunter speak directly, and Kate speak
less directly, to issues of their own and others personal and
psychological safety. I share those concerns. The right words to
express those things are not always easy to find, but speaking out
about them is a huge and brave thing to do, an act of the highest
integrity. It's something that I didn't have the guts or jam to do
until a couple of nights ago and over which I let my anger build up
unhealthily in the interest of "keeping the peace." I suspect Kate
and Hunter did that too, until it had to be let out. I think they did
pretty darned well with it all, considering how much anger they must
be/have been feeling. I think they did a lot better than I did.

I am acknowledging these things, speaking the truth of them, because
I think they are not matters of mere internal political disagreement.
These are show-stopping matters of being able to come participate in
this work safely and I am seeing at least two incredible activists and
organizers expressing grave concerns. That is the issue. I believe
it is inappropriate and will ultimately be divisive and destructive to
try to re-cast all this as an issue of Dani's safety or procedural
rights and to try to put Kate or others on the defensive for being
brave and strong enough to speak out. I have seen no actual
acknowledgment of the problem they've articulated. I view that as
problematic, personally. Hugely so.

I also acknowledge that after the other night, Dani and perhaps the
TAS officers may not feel safe around me. Under the circumstances,
I'm sorry to have to say that I am perfectly fine with that. The
feeling is mutual. I recognize that it may be appropriate for me to
stay away from any meeting, but on the other hand, if Kate and Hunter
want me there as an ally I will come.

It was a great forum and a great march. I was glad I could be part of it.

Shannon

[r g]

folks, isnt Dani off of this list? i thought she requested this some time ago? if so, none of this is getting to her, far as i understand.

--


"Only through the state of being present can one take joy, and it is impossible to be present in this environment that is called the world without being a heartbroken loser. So get it the fuck on."
                                      ~ Inga Muscio ~

[Shannon Blatt]

My words were not meant specifically for Dani alone by any means,
though I think she's still on the list actually.

shannon

[Kate Lamothe]

Hi all,

First off, Dani is no longer on the list so if you want your messages to get to her, you have to include her email as well danib...@yahoo.com

Secondly, I get the sense (from gwen & corey) that folks are saying that I single-handedly have removed her from the collective...which is so not the case.  I tried to use as many "I feel" statements as possible.  All I was trying to say is that in my opinion, she is no longer welcome on the collective.  Again, only my opinion, take it for what it's worth. 


(These next words may come off as angry or whatever so I'll bold certain parts to highlight that again, it's only my opinion)

I believe a meeting is a good step, but I honestly feel as though I'll be silenced if Dani is allowed to attend it. I don't feel safe to truly say what's on my mind in a meeting space while she is huffing and puffing and scoffing. I must say that I am willing to leave the collective over this.  I feel as though I cannot continue engaging with, in my opinion, oppressive behaviour.  In my opinion, it's a matter of does the collective want to drive away a member that did little to no work or collective members (ie: hunter & I) who spent between 20 to 35 hours a week putting this on? 

I'll be blunt, if Dani is allowed to stay, I will leave.


Solidarity?
Kate

P.S. On the divisiveness note, I feel as though the community is already divided.  What I was doing was merely making it public. In my opinion, speaking out about oppression is not divisive, silencing those who speak out about it is!

[Gwenneth Athena Katsaris]

I'm sorry Shannon, but I cannot totally agree with you.  I didn't say, when i commented about the tone of Kate's post, that Dani's safety was at issue.  That is for Dani to decide and articulate if she so wishes.  It was concerns about my safety I was addressing. I believe i made that very clear.  It frightened me.  Why didn't I speak out about Dani's behaviour ?  I didn't because I just don't feel as strongly about it as Kate, Hunter, and you.  I can continue to work with Dani, but my feelings are not what is relevant.  What matters is that someone is seriously upset and does not feel safe with Dani.  That is clear. I think you and I are in agreement on this, and as far as I know , nobody has questioned the validity of Kate's or Hunter's concerns and personal feelings. It is a very serious issue, and has to be dealt with.  Having said that, I cannot agree that my desire to continue using consensus is merely procedural.  This is not some minor thing like a point of order.  It is fundamental.  Either we are a consensus based collective or we are not.  I believe, what is at stake here, is the very nature and integrity of the collective. 

 

For me, this has nothing to do with defense or offense. My overriding concern is with the divisions this conflict is creating.  Our community is very important to me.  It is now the only family I have.  Watching people I care about attacking each other is very painful for me.

 
Regarding the TAS meeting, you've explained to me why you were angry, and I understand.  I can't condone how you, or any of us, behaved that evening.  We were all angry at some point, and I acknowledge that Dani and you were extremely so.  I must assume that when you refer to TAS officers, that includes me, and that you don't feel safe with me.  I am very saddened to hear that.  I'm sorry.  As for myself, well yeah, there were a few moments there that I didn't feel safe in the same room with you, but it passed :).  Although I can't really speak on behalf of the other people at the meeting, my impression after you left was, that you were still welcome at TAS meetings.  In fact, when you left, I think that most of us felt an acute sense of loss. 

On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Shannon Blatt <shanno...@gmail.com> wrote:

[r g]

VTF is a collective who decides things based on consensus (that was decided on consensus!). If there is consensus that someone/s needs to leave, that person/s will hopefully and should really take it as a hint and leave. Sometimes folks will fight tooth and nail, and/or otherwise abuse the consensus process. But i feel that when all parties feel they have been heard, even if not to their full satisfaction, that doesn't happen as often. But it can. i wonder what sorts of processes you have set up to deal with the eventuality that perhaps it won't be an easy decision as a collective to make via consensus?

[Gwenneth Athena Katsaris]

Hi Kate,

 

Yes, you are correct, you did state that Dani not being welcome in the collective, was your own opinion.  However, you also made it clear that you would explicitly try to exclude Dani by intentionally scheduling the debrief on a day Dani would not be able to attend.  I assumed the same would apply for any future meetings, and also assumed we would not have the opportunity to reach consensus on that decision.  If both these assumptions are true, then it follows that Dani has been effectively banned without consensus.  On the other hand, if either of those assumptions is not true, please forgive me for my assertion that you were trying to ban Dani on your own. 

 

As for being blunt, I appreciate you being explicit, but  I'm pretty sure everyone already understands that you will leave if Dani stays. I have no problem with you making that statement.  It is your right, but as I said in my earlier post,  i feel you walking out would mean the de facto dissolution of the collective and I think that would be a terrible loss. You are that important.  Having said that, I understand that this may indeed happen, but I honestly don't think that an attempt to reach consensus on this issue, is predetermined to fail.  To underscore that, I probably should mention now, that contrary to what some folks may believe, I'm undecided.  I don't know what I will do. It depends on what happens at the meeting. So, I don't think anyone can predict for certain what the outcome will be.  That is, unless someone, again, has a time machine tucked away somewhere :).  That's why i'd like to at least try.

 

I accept that you honestly feel as though you'd be silenced if Dani is allowed to attend a meeting, and on this I agree with you, insomuch as I think Dani should not be present while we try to reach agreement.  I think giving Dani the opportunity to make a short statement before leaving, is fair and reasonable, but that is just my opinion.

 

Well, I think that's about it for me.  I feel totally spent.  Writing this stuff just drains your soul. I've tried to convince everyone that going through a consensus process to decide Dani's fate, is worth the risk, the risk being no consensus is reached and that in turn results in the breaking of the collective.  I think it is worth it, because the very purpose of consensus decision making is, at least in part, to make sure weaker, shier voices are heard and everyone feels they have a voice.  To bypass it would mean, that what you feel Dani is doing, i.e silencing people, could be done at any time, to anyone by the stronger, more dominant voices, simply by expelling them.  Finally, and perhaps just as important, to me anyways, it is worth it because it also gives us a chance to reach closure in such a way that at least some of the wounds this divisive issue has already caused, are healed, or at the very least, not made any worse. 

 

And now is perhaps the time to confess, that i have been intentionally rather selfish because, up until now, i have not discussed one other option. I could just shut up and leave everyone alone. :)  The bad news is that, if I did that, and Dani was removed from the collective without us even trying to reach consensus, then I would have to leave.  I really don't want to, but I couldn't stay because, not being allowed to even attempt consensus, on an issue I feel is so critically important, would leave me feeling as if my voice counted for nothing.  The good news is that I'm not you Kate. ;)  My leaving will not break the collective. The collective would go on, and at least be spared any further divisiveness on my account.  

 

Thanks for listening to what, I hope, hasn't been entirely babble.  :)

 

Gwen. 

[Corey Keith]

Kate, I don't believe you single handedly removed Dani.  i believe a couple messages a go confirmed, she removed herself.  As Gwen says, both your and Hunters concerns are very important and need to be taken seriously and as Shannon said, what you said was put together very well considering the amount of anger you both have (had).

As it sounds like, many people from many points of view felt unsafe and felt unheard.  no one needs to feel this way.  that is why I am and it seems most of us are in favor of another meeting.  how ever this meeting is necessary and will be tough for all of us.  If I do facilitate, this why I asked for a neutral person who can assist or co-facilitate to make sure things remain respectful.  If we do ask Dani to attend, I don't believe dani will attend at this point. but if she does- as we would with any member - being very clear on the ground rules of the meeting - including huffing and puffing and other behaviors that are potentially silencing to any member of the group.  I feel a person should get one chance and then be asked to leave. and if they are asked to leave they loose the rights to have a vote on the rest of the meeting.  Although we are all human, i believe most of us can work with this anyway.

In terms of dani staying on the collective.  i don't believe she would remain even if we asked her too.  And if she did remain, i could totally understand why you would want to leave or anyone else for that matter, with what you have shared. 

i also want to say, that weather in a meeting or online here a lot of our emotions are high and possibly on the defensive...which is very under-stable.  saying that, I suggest we be mindful of this as this is where the highest probability for misinterpretation for what a person said or there intention (including myself).   everyone is doing there best to do this and i would suggest to assist this process, if we are not sure or think they perceive a negative intention or what someone said, check it out.  ask, and maybe the other person can from a misinterpretation as well.

I hope that makes sense. 

 

Namaste,

Corey

There is not enough darkness in all the world to put out the light of even one small candle.

 ~Robert Alden

"Infinite Diversity, in Infinite Combinations"

-Gene Roddenberry (Credo)

---

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:14:33 -0700

Subject: Re: Your words are meaningless in the face of your (in)actions

From: romhamg...@gmail.com
To: vancouver-...@googlegroups.com

[Corey Keith]

hi all,

I have been doing some thinking.  I am in support of having the meeting on a day Dani can be present.  For two reasons.  One is personal, as my parents are comming from alberta to see me and I need to spend as much time with them as possible. My prior statement of being at the meeting as usually I, jump in too soon.  :)    the other piece i see is that all voices must be heard, including dani's.  If she choices not to attend that is her choice, however, the opportunity in my mind needs to be there.  Obviously ground rules need to be set up so everyone feels safe.

Anyway, what everyone chooses is up to the group, however, I must stick to both my priorities and beliefs.

 

Namaste,

Corey

There is not enough darkness in all the world to put out the light of even one small candle.

 ~Robert Alden

"Infinite Diversity, in Infinite Combinations"

-Gene Roddenberry (Credo)

---

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:36:40 -0700

Subject: Re: Your words are meaningless in the face of your (in)actions

From: gwennet...@gmail.com
To: vancouver-...@googlegroups.com

[hunter cubitt-cooke]

hello everyone.
I have been taking space from this, and that feels good. It's been very dissapointing to be dealing with so much toxic energy around this. luckily the positive affects of community building, personal liberation, the satisfaction of meaningfull political engangement, the meeting of new people etc continue to make sense to me. they make it worth it.
I am weary of entering a space that will just be an energy suck.

A few things: dani formally left the group. she asked to be removed from the list herself and fullfilled no forum responsibilities. It was her choice. She re-entered the forum in a disruptive, dominating way;  but most importantly she consistantly does not respect the rules of conversation during meetings. she has been asked over and over to respect the rules agreed apon by the collective and over and over she crosses those boundaries. how are we supposed to enter a meeting with any trust that this is not how she will act? I personally feel like IF she came she would be coming only to yell at me, at kate, and at who knows who else. I really dont see why it wouldnt be that way and i really dont feel like putting myself through that. i was facilitating a meeting, litterally yelling at her: stop talking! stop talking right now! she just continued, yelling over top of me. telling yet another story having nothing to do with what we were talking about that centers around her.

IF dani wants to come I would like her to do some communicating first. I feel the breach of trust has been large enough that she needs to make some commitments to actually following basic ground rules for me to feel much hope for a productive conversation.

also I'm wondering if this whole debate is pointless. can someone ask dani if she still wants to be part of the collective considering everything thats been said?
hunter

[Gwenneth Athena Katsaris]

I think Hunter is right.  We should find out what Dani's intentions are.  I've already sent her an email and left a phone message, but I haven't heard back.  I think she is in Seattle.  If it's ok with everyone, I will ask her when she contacts me.

 

Gwen

[Corey Keith]

Thanks Hunter for that. I am glad you are taking some space for yourself.   I think you are right, I think we may be spending energy on something we may not have to.  I have no problem if Gwen, if you want to contact Dani and confirm her status.

 

Namaste,

Corey

There is not enough darkness in all the world to put out the light of even one small candle.

 ~Robert Alden

"Infinite Diversity, in Infinite Combinations"

-Gene Roddenberry (Credo)

---

Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 22:52:00 -0700

[Kate Lamothe]

i think I'll reserve my further comments until I know whether Dani does in fact still want in on this collective.

---

kate