[Consensus] [Facilitation] What To Do About GA?

Gregory Murphy gsjmurphy at gmail.com
Tue Apr 24 23:36:45 EDT 2012


Matt - I don't understand how a SC could possibly be related to being
"assimilated by the borg," and I disagree with the screwdriver analogy you
are using, but will reserve future remarks for in person meetings.

I am thinking everyone else on this thread may not be appreciating our back
and forth.

GM





On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Matt Carroll <mattbcarroll at yahoo.com>wrote:

> Because making it impossible to have an individual voice is the first step
> in that process. I came to occupy because I'm an anarchist, not because I
> wanted to be assimilated by the borg. This is a step in a bad direction,
> and also a misuse of what a spokes council is actually good for. It's like
> insisting on hammering in a screw when you have a perfectly good
> screwdriver, because someone once had their feelings hurt by a screwdriver
> being used poorly.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Gregory Murphy <gsjmurphy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Matt - I do not understand your use of the phrase "sketchy shadow
> government" in reference to a Spokescouncil which had OB buy-in and full
> participation. That is what I envision and am suggesting.
>
> It is unfortunate that you've "been around organizing where one thing got
> decided at a meeting and that decision got changed behind closed doors."
> What is the relevance of raising that experience in this dialogue,  I am
> not advocating for that and am unsure why you use it as an argument against
> SC. It seems an inappropriate analogy.  Where are the "closed doors" in a
> Spokescouncil?
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Matt Carroll < <mattbcarroll at yahoo.com>
> mattbcarroll at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> If you can speak for yourself and aren't required to filter that through
>> another group to be heard it's a better vehicle for discussing change.
>> Having the change made using the tools already established in a space
>> already established is above the board and easy to follow, and doesn't look
>> like some sort of .
>>
>> I've 's not good. Moving towards decisions being made by wgs and ags away
>> from public meetings is moving towards that.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 24, 2012, at 3:21 PM, Gregory Murphy < <gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>> gsjmurphy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Matt - going through GA , which most everyone, including the GA faithful
>> feel needs major overhaul, to execute that major overhaul, seems to me a
>> faulty reasoning or argument.
>>
>> I disagree with your analysis, again:
>>
>> Since so many people have dropped out of GA, the only continuity is the
>> fact that GA keeps happening, and that the GA faithful keep attending.
>> (Please, this is observation, not a slight against anyone., I still attend
>> GA, albeit, occasionally.)
>>
>> As per transparency - I do not understand your concern about that, at
>> all.  Every SpokesCouncil meeting can be live-streamed, and minutes can be
>> kept - in accordance with the hoped for level of transparency at a GA.  GAs
>> are not inherently "more" transparent, in fact, I can't remember the last
>> time a GA was live-streamed.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Matt Carroll < <mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com>
>> mattbcarroll at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It's a flawed process that works well enough to get things done, even if
>>> those things often get done in a slow and painful manner. Going through ga
>>> to change ga keeps continuity and is more transparent.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 23, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Anthony Bucci < <abucci at occupyboston.org><abucci at occupyboston.org>
>>> abucci at occupyboston.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> A spokesouncil is, in essence, just a formalized, concurrent way of
>>> organizing the discussions that already happen in working groups and
>>> caucuses. There's nothing magical or mysterious about it. There's no added
>>> trauma either, only what individuals choose to bring into the room with
>>> them. The structure of the conversation does not encourage that any more
>>> than the general assembly structure does.
>>>
>>> Perhaps more to the point, though, if the recognition is that the
>>> general assembly is a troubled process at the moment, why would anyone
>>> think that flawed process is able to fix itself? Isn't this one of those
>>> doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results
>>> moments? Hammer/nail?
>>>
>>> Anthony
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Gregory Murphy < <gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>>> gsjmurphy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Carolyn,
>>>>
>>>> I hear ya 'bout email conversation difficulty, so I will be brief.
>>>>
>>>> I think many of us have an misconception about spokescouncils, and I
>>>> don't think our experience with the M17 test helped clarify anything, in
>>>> fact, I think it added to misinformation about SCs..
>>>>
>>>> I posit that a SC, if run properly, will elicit the *greatest possible
>>>> # of direct voices* and perspectives. Now, not everyone will hear each
>>>> voice stating its direct viewpoint, but each voice can and will be heard at
>>>> a WG and AG level.  Would we not want 100s of voices to be heard, in this
>>>> way, when making a decision. then only 30 to 50 voices at a GA?
>>>>
>>>> Again - I am all for public discussion in as many venues as possible. I
>>>> am advocating SC's as a decision making approach, to be started as the next
>>>> step, after lots of public sharing of ideas.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Carolyn Magid < <cmagid at gmail.com><cmagid at gmail.com><cmagid at gmail.com>
>>>> cmagid at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all.  I find it difficult to have this conversation on email, but
>>>>> feel strongly enough about the issues to weigh in briefly.  If proposals I
>>>>> disagree with go forward, I'll have more to say then.
>>>>>
>>>>>    - I agree with Rich (and Greg?) that we should be deciding what to
>>>>>    do about GAs as part of a more general discussion about directions for
>>>>>    OB. I think it would be a serious mistake to cut back GAs without first
>>>>>    having that discussion.
>>>>>     - Based on experience in many organizations, I don't think that
>>>>>    it isn't easy to regain meeting times that are lost.
>>>>>    - I agree with Matt C and Jorge on the need to come to major
>>>>>    decisions for OB in a way that directly (not representatively) involves as
>>>>>    many members as possible.  So I am against Greg's idea about creating a
>>>>>    spokescouncil to make these decisions. A special assembly sounds fine to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> In solidarity,
>>>>> Carolyn
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Gregory Murphy <<gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>>>>> gsjmurphy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Matt - I certainly do not mean to exclude a dialog or conversation
>>>>>> amongst any group of OB individuals. In fact, I encourage it. I encourage
>>>>>> GA process be talked about and examined in as many settings, as possible.
>>>>>> I'd even like to see another community GA brainstorming session.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am recommending that SC be used as the *decision making model* for
>>>>>> actually co-creating a new GA structure. Let as many discussions happen at
>>>>>> every level, but I do not think bringing a proposal to GA serves the
>>>>>> greater good, because not enough people will be present to sufficiently
>>>>>> represent OB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I firmly believe that we need as much representation as possible for
>>>>>> this undertaking.  I firmly believe, that if the SC is structured well,
>>>>>> with community buy-in and adherence to principles and values and ways of
>>>>>> being, with enough time in the process for dialogue and consensus at both
>>>>>> WG and AG levels, OB stands the best possible chance of success, when it
>>>>>> comes to creating a new GA structure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Matt Carroll <<mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com>
>>>>>> mattbcarroll at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  How is spokes possibly a better vehicle for discussion than a
>>>>>>> setting where people interact as individuals. A spokes council is clunky
>>>>>>> and is totally the wrong tool for the job.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 23, 2012, at 3:28 PM, Gregory Murphy < <gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> gsjmurphy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  I agree with Rich's concern, and insight . . . and am going to
>>>>>>> push the envelope, here.  (PS - I have also read the other emails, sent
>>>>>>> after Rich sent his.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> May I suggest - and please no throwing tomatoes, nor stones  - that
>>>>>>> we call for a Spokescouncil specifically to address GA restructuring.  I am
>>>>>>> excited to realize that FWG (and others) has/have a lot of energy to
>>>>>>> address some of the ongoing difficulties of GA, both to "free" us from some
>>>>>>> difficult and challenging procedures, and to make it more "user friendly,"
>>>>>>> inviting and inclusive.  That said, a SC focused on General Assembly would
>>>>>>> provide a much broader opportunity for participation and (hopefully) buy-in
>>>>>>> from the greater OB community.  And I think that broader participation is
>>>>>>> essential to the health of our community.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There was really good energy at that GA Community GA discussion, and
>>>>>>> it attracted attendance from more than just the ongoing GA core group. The
>>>>>>> GAPaP was one attempt to harness the energy and good ideas which arose in
>>>>>>> the meeting. When I asked what happened to that WG, I was told that it
>>>>>>> mostly consisted of FWG members (that was true at the meeting I attended),
>>>>>>> and failed to attract a broader constituency, and then fell apart - I am
>>>>>>> unsure of whether this was a conscious choice, or not.  Why was it that
>>>>>>> GAPaP did not take hold?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it great that FWG is collectively, and FWG members are
>>>>>>> individually, dedicated and inspired to make GA improvements. We all
>>>>>>> recognize that these are overdue and long time coming. That said, I think
>>>>>>> FWG is "stuck between a rock and a hard place," so to speak . . . in a
>>>>>>> sense, "damned if you do and damned if you don't."  Rightly or wrongly,
>>>>>>> there is a perception that FWG "controls" the process too much. And, I know
>>>>>>> that we are aware of that perception and have searched our collective
>>>>>>> souls, about how best to proceed . . . and at times, have felt paralyzed.
>>>>>>> It seems that paralysis stage is over - bravo!  But why perpetuate that
>>>>>>> impression and possibly set the stage for the possible changes not being
>>>>>>> received well?  Why not open the process so more voices can help craft the
>>>>>>> coming changes, and not just the few who faithfully attend GA?  Why keep
>>>>>>> perpetuating the status quo of the GA centric?  *I do not think an
>>>>>>> FWG Proposal, nor an Individual Proposal is the best approach, at this time
>>>>>>> * . . . it is not in the best interest of OB - and I say that with
>>>>>>> the utmost respect for the intelligence, intention and dedication of my
>>>>>>> fellow FWG members.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I ask that we stop strategizing how best to bring the proposals to
>>>>>>> GA, and slow down, reach out to the broader community to create a General
>>>>>>> Assembly Spokescouncil (which could meet, once per week), and bring our
>>>>>>> creative ideas there, to be shared, reviewed, challenged, chewed over,
>>>>>>> added to . . . and reached consensus on, by the Community.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The M17 test SC developed the below values**, If the OB community
>>>>>>> can collectively agree to abide by them, and live them, meeting by
>>>>>>> Spokescouncil meeting, I think we can, together, as a community, create a
>>>>>>> stronger, more dynamic GA. I also hold out hope that such a process can
>>>>>>> begin to address and possibly help us move on from some of the divisions
>>>>>>> existing in our community.   We all saw the backlash that erupted when the
>>>>>>> folks behind the SC ( a coalition of GA and non GA adherents) brought
>>>>>>> forward the idea to test one - people's motivations were questioned and
>>>>>>> trust levels were non existent.  We need to move on from those daze and
>>>>>>> agree to try out another technology, with the best interest of OB at the
>>>>>>> center of why we do so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do I think the task for a GA specific SpokesCouncil is easy - no.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do I think consensus is possible - absolutely!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let us adhere these values, and also live by the guidelines offered
>>>>>>> by the Safer Spaces group in their AntiOppression proposal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ***All attending will commit to the following principles:
>>>>>>> **
>>>>>>> A full consensus process will be used. *
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a) unity of purpose
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> b) trust
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. does not equal approval or friendship
>>>>>>>    2. assume the best motivations/intentions; then inquire
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> c) respect
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. for emotional as well as logical concerns
>>>>>>>    2. criticize acts not persons
>>>>>>>    3. objections/criticisms of acts are not attacks, they are
>>>>>>>    concerns
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> d) cooperation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. bring an attitude of helpfulness & support
>>>>>>>    2. not competitive, not about winning but building a solution
>>>>>>>    together
>>>>>>>    3. adversarial attitudes focus attention on weaknesses rather
>>>>>>>    than strength
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> e) non-coercion
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. disagreement is healthy and necessary to motivate change
>>>>>>>    2. conflict is desirable when it can be resolved cooperatively
>>>>>>>    with respect, nonviolence, and creativity.
>>>>>>>    3. it is coercive to use power to dominate or control the process
>>>>>>>    4. maximum power to persuade should be the revealing of your
>>>>>>>    present truth
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> f) self-empowerment
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. delegation of decision-making authority is failure to accept
>>>>>>>    responsibility
>>>>>>>    2. anyone can express concerns, seek creative solutions
>>>>>>>    3. everyone is responsible for every decision
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> g) conflict resolution
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. conflict = disagreement, not battle
>>>>>>>    2. strengths & weaknesses of attitudes, assumptions, plans are
>>>>>>>    highlighted by disagreement
>>>>>>>    3. use conflict to push self & group to self-assess, do not
>>>>>>>    focus on other individuals
>>>>>>>    4. there is no ‘right’, only best for now for this group
>>>>>>>    5. avoid blaming - that attacks dignity, elicits guilt,
>>>>>>>    defensiveness, alienation
>>>>>>>    6. people will hide truth to avoid blame & group loses ability
>>>>>>>    to resolve conflicts
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> h) commitment to the group
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. upon joining one accepts personal responsibility for respect,
>>>>>>>    good will, honesty
>>>>>>>    2. recognize group’s needs have priority over individual desires
>>>>>>>    3. share responsibility for finding solutions to everyone’s
>>>>>>>    concerns
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i) active participation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. create atmosphere in which every contribution is considered
>>>>>>>    valuable and where disagreement can be expressed in a supportive environment
>>>>>>>    2. avoid belittling, eye-rolling, sighing, aggressive hand
>>>>>>>    signals, and other means of diminishing
>>>>>>>    3. do not be attached to personal opinions or ideas
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> j) equal access to power
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. consciously attempt to creatively share power, skills,
>>>>>>>    information
>>>>>>>    2. avoid hierarchy
>>>>>>>    3. if at any point during the process any individual feels
>>>>>>>    oppressed or offended by the language used by another individual, they may
>>>>>>>    opt to say "ouch." At this point, the process will stop, and the individual
>>>>>>>    will explain what it was that was hurtful and why. Another small pause will
>>>>>>>    be observed, and the process will continue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> k) patience
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    1. consensus cannot be rushed
>>>>>>>    2. difficult situations must be allowed time
>>>>>>>    3. patience is more advantageous than urgency
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> REMEMBER - the SpokeCouncil model employed should build in time and
>>>>>>> respect for the flow of information: up from affinity and working groups to
>>>>>>> the SC, and then back down from the SC to AGs and WGs, continually, over
>>>>>>> and over, until consensus is reached. It is not just the people present at
>>>>>>> the SC who reach agreement on decisions, it is everyone participating in an
>>>>>>> OB WG and or AG, who has a say.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In solidarity,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PS  - I have included a bunch of OB groups, in this email
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Richard Levy <<richlevyus at yahoo.com><richlevyus at yahoo.com><richlevyus at yahoo.com><richlevyus at yahoo.com>
>>>>>>> richlevyus at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  I finally got a chance to look at this thread and have a few
>>>>>>>> ideas/reactions
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I too am apprehensive about cutting down to 1 GA because 1. I do
>>>>>>>> not necessarily believe that it would be likely/possible to get others back
>>>>>>>> in the future (though not impossible) and 2. I don't believe that the other
>>>>>>>> 'replacements/surrogates' for GA, that is SAA's and Community meetings,
>>>>>>>> haven't been all that successful either.  This leads back to two wider
>>>>>>>> issues: 1 that we will increase membership and participation (in a range of
>>>>>>>> forms I believe) through more and larger actions on key issues and 2.
>>>>>>>> within that the key to improving the GA is what we use it for (and this is
>>>>>>>> linked to all the other restructuring proposals which I believe should be
>>>>>>>> discussed as a whole before we make this type of decision and that
>>>>>>>> discussion might start (but not conclude nor be restricted to) facilitation
>>>>>>>> if there were a big meeting (or at least part of one - which is what I
>>>>>>>> though we had agreed on last Wednesday ( but I could be wrong))
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The idea of having GAs in Roxbury and other communities is a good
>>>>>>>> one and it is very positive that POC is doing the planning for that, but
>>>>>>>> since only the GA can call GAs, it would be necessary to bring such ideas
>>>>>>>> before GA at a minimum
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> it would seem that if we were having one 'regular non-neighborhood
>>>>>>>> based' GA Sunday night might be a good night (better than Saturday I would
>>>>>>>> expect)
>>>>>>>> rich
>>>>>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>>>>>> *From:* Gregory Murphy < <gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> *To:* Jorge Alvarez < <eghm627 at mac.com> <eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com>
>>>>>>>> eghm627 at mac.com>
>>>>>>>> *Cc:* "<Occupy-Boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com><Occupy-Boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com><Occupy-Boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com><Occupy-Boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com>
>>>>>>>> Occupy-Boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com" <<occupy-boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com><occupy-boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com><occupy-boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com><occupy-boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com>
>>>>>>>> occupy-boston-people-of-color-working-group at googlegroups.com>; "<facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org" <<facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Monday, April 23, 2012 11:38 AM
>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Facilitation] Wed meeting and proposals on table
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am pretty sure POC is looking to establish a weekly GA - but
>>>>>>>> let's confirm
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> GM
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Jorge Alvarez < <eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com>
>>>>>>>> eghm627 at mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  My amendments:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. Hold 2 GAs not one.
>>>>>>>> 2. Rotate the second GA through a number of communities, not just
>>>>>>>> Roxbury, eg., East Boston has many people of color that are
>>>>>>>> underrepresented and there are others, and we shouldn't forget the wider
>>>>>>>> 99% in all surrounding neighborhoods. Yes, including in more affluent
>>>>>>>> neighborhoods -- they desperately need the EDUCATION and ENLIGHTENMENT.
>>>>>>>> 3. Rotate SAA weekly between Tuesdays an Thursdays.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I prefer compromise where everyone cedes some ground and alienates
>>>>>>>> the least. Otherwise, we're bound for more downward spiral and continuing
>>>>>>>> to alienate some constituency that will eventually leave.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm at the gym and it's not conducive to considered thought or
>>>>>>>> feedback. I will provide more feedback later.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My impression of Roxbury GAs was that they were to be occasional,
>>>>>>>> not necessarily serially on the same night.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This needs far wider discussion and consideration by ALL or as many
>>>>>>>> as are willing to humanly participate, from every corner, TOGETHER.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With peace,
>>>>>>>> Jorge
>>>>>>>>  <eghm627 at mac.com> <eghm627 at mac.com> <eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com>
>>>>>>>> eghm627 at mac.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  This email was composed on my IPhone. Please excuse any errors.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Apr 23, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Matthew Hacker <<mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> mh at occupyboston.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   Hi Greg,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm aware that POC is planning to hold GAs in Roxbury, but as I've
>>>>>>>> understood, through the grapevine, those GAs are a little ways off from
>>>>>>>> being realized. It doesn't make sense to me to hold GAs in the meantime
>>>>>>>> only to keep anyone from being conditioned to expect that night off. I keep
>>>>>>>> thinking a little breathing room now would do everyone some good. I expect
>>>>>>>> the organizers of the Roxbury GA will also want to use their own process,
>>>>>>>> guidelines, etc. Yoking that project to the current schedule of GAs in OB
>>>>>>>> members' minds seems like setting up for failure POC and the other groups
>>>>>>>> working on a different model. Who knows, maybe cutting down on GAs now will
>>>>>>>> refresh some of the enthusiasm for horizontal community decision-making
>>>>>>>> that I don't really see except among the usual crowd in our current format.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, I need to say that it isn't a FWG proposal, and that's
>>>>>>>> somewhat intentional. Among those of us who have dedicated a lot of time to
>>>>>>>> the way GAs are run, I think there's bound to be a perspective on the GA
>>>>>>>> that is rosier and more optimistic--at least regarding its potential to
>>>>>>>> host a multiplicity of community interactions and conversations--than there
>>>>>>>> is outside FWG. I'm wary of appearing to disregard the concerns and input
>>>>>>>> of a group integrally tied to the success of GA, but I also believe this
>>>>>>>> proposal shouldn't be filtered too heavily by that perspective before it
>>>>>>>> reaches the broader discussion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That said, I will continue to listen to concerns and will
>>>>>>>> collaborate with anyone interested in amending the proposal. Particularly,
>>>>>>>> I'd like to know what on what night POC is planning to hold GA in Roxbury,
>>>>>>>> since my proposal moves Strategic Action Assembly to Tuesdays.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would like to present the GA with the most radical option, and
>>>>>>>> the one most necessary in my mind, before the decision is made that cutting
>>>>>>>> to one GA is in excess of what serves the community.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Gregory Murphy <<gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> gsjmurphy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would hope your thinking is correct, Ariel, but I am unsure and
>>>>>>>> advise caution, cooperation and outreach . . .  hopefully, we will see a
>>>>>>>> joint FWG/POC proposal emerge.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Ariel Nicole <<arieloboston at gmail.com><arieloboston at gmail.com><arieloboston at gmail.com><arieloboston at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> arieloboston at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just because we decrease OB GA's now doesn't mean we couldn't end
>>>>>>>> up adding back a GA in Roxbury if thats what happens.......
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I also think its not true that we cant add things back, that we
>>>>>>>> will "never get them back" seems misguided to me...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ariel
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Gregory Murphy <<gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> gsjmurphy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  I have a concern about the idea of cutting GAs to one per week .
>>>>>>>> . .  how does this thinking mesh with POC and the Allies intention to
>>>>>>>> produce an OB sanctioned GA in Roxbury?  POC's thinking is to propose to
>>>>>>>> move one of the existing GAs to Roxbury, e.g., Thursday night . . . I
>>>>>>>> think  Matt C raises a legitimate concern, *"if we cut those days
>>>>>>>> that we can all be in the same place at the same time, we're never going to
>>>>>>>> get them back"  *
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the one GA per week is in Roxbury, then I do not have a concern,
>>>>>>>> but please know that POC is in the process of laying the groundwork for a
>>>>>>>> Roxbury GA and is a few months away from being ready to start producing
>>>>>>>> one. I am in favor of 2 GAs per week:  one downtown and one in Roxbury.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have heard good support for a Roxbury GA from both GA attending
>>>>>>>> folks and from those who do not currently attend GA. I advise caution in
>>>>>>>> proceeding too far down this track. I urge that those in Facilitation who
>>>>>>>> are pushing to decrease GAs to one per week to reach out to POC and talk.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I cc POC google group in this email.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Matthew Hacker <<mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> mh at occupyboston.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Matt,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know there are concerns that dropping a GA means we can never get
>>>>>>>> it back. My sense is that if we don't drop GAs now, we may never get back
>>>>>>>> the people who feel that GA is intent on having GAs without actually
>>>>>>>> representing the community in its decision-making. I think multiple GAs
>>>>>>>> served a purpose when we were searching for shared space after Dewey in
>>>>>>>> December, January and February. I think multiple GAs a week now presents an
>>>>>>>> excuse to make decisions about things that aren't that important in the
>>>>>>>> long run and to put off discussions and work around the role of the
>>>>>>>> movement/organization in social justice work happening outside OB.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> GAs take a lot of energy both to administrate and to attend. I
>>>>>>>> think good decision-making process has a place in the
>>>>>>>> movement/organization. I also think we do ourselves a disservice by trying
>>>>>>>> to maintain that process and a standard of horizontal democracy in which we
>>>>>>>> can all take a lot of pride while running along from GA to GA every other
>>>>>>>> day or so. We can try to make the GA friendlier, and perhaps the discussion
>>>>>>>> proposal that just passed will do so, but I'm skeptical that productive,
>>>>>>>> creative discussions are coming to a space that I often attend out of
>>>>>>>> obligation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My hope is that someone finds productive community time for
>>>>>>>> Thursday or Sunday that doesn't involve points of process. Potlucks,
>>>>>>>> discussions, reading groups, trainings all seem like better uses of our
>>>>>>>> time at the moment than plowing through solidarity proposals. But those
>>>>>>>> other meetings that will fill up where the GA used to be seem pretty useful
>>>>>>>> at this point too. I also have a hope, if not a conviction, that the
>>>>>>>> quality of the items that end up on the GA's agenda will improve as the
>>>>>>>> community comes to value GAs as more precious and representative events.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So that's why I think it's important and necessary to bring this
>>>>>>>> proposal. I expect a lot of concerns, and since I don't know what it would
>>>>>>>> look like in the wake of a change like this, I'm pretty sure I won't be
>>>>>>>> able to resolve them all. But I like to try things, and though I'm reticent
>>>>>>>> about a lot of things because I don't think I have the experience or the
>>>>>>>> knowledge to offer up a better way forward, I do feel like maneuvering
>>>>>>>> around GA is a change the movement will make on its own, with or without
>>>>>>>> formal consent in GA, and if we don't respond by doubling down on our
>>>>>>>> efforts to serve that inclination by making the time we do set aside for
>>>>>>>> community decisions more rare and meaningful, there won't be movement
>>>>>>>> decisions to facilitate in any case.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Look forward to getting feedback.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Matt Carroll <<mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>> mattbcarroll at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So - are we having a long meeting Wednesday or what? I really want
>>>>>>>> to have a discussion about all the current ga ideas on the table before we
>>>>>>>> start changing ga more, because I think trying to make the best process out
>>>>>>>> of these options and just making a total rewrite is a better way to
>>>>>>>> approach it than bolting new parts on to the weird rube Goldberg device we
>>>>>>>> already have.  I think we all know how this works well enough to make
>>>>>>>> something that works better from the ground up. Make it simple, make it
>>>>>>>> responsive, make it flexible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I also really don't think we should gut our ga schedule before we
>>>>>>>> try this. Ga can be something much better, and if we cut those days that we
>>>>>>>> can all be in the same place at the same time, we're never going to get
>>>>>>>> them back. It'll fill up with other meetings in under 48 hours and people
>>>>>>>> will pitch a fit about what's being donkey konged no matter what day you
>>>>>>>> suggest or what time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyway, sorry if I'm coming off as frustrated but I've been trying
>>>>>>>> to get this to happen for over a fortnight and we keep rolling our stack
>>>>>>>> over and it never happens.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 12:44 PM, Matthew Hacker <<mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> mh at occupyboston.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  don't know if I'll be on time to the meeting, but if we talk
>>>>>>>> about the GA page, maybe we can discuss how we would like the page
>>>>>>>> hierarchy to look. as in, I think we can make a separate "Agenda" page
>>>>>>>> under the General Assembly link pretty easily, and when new proposals are
>>>>>>>> posted to the Agenda page we can also post it to Facebook. I imagine it
>>>>>>>> would come up on the Facebook page as 'Agenda' each time something new was
>>>>>>>> posted (and we can choose to check or uncheck posting to Facebook as
>>>>>>>> necessary), which would work kind of like the text alerts Greg was
>>>>>>>> suggesting in his proposal, but on more of a rolling basis.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> oh wait, did I just suggest an agenda item for a meeting I don't
>>>>>>>> know I'll be attending? maybe that's bad form. if I can't be there, I'll
>>>>>>>> bring it up another time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> see you all at GA!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Jorge Alvarez < <eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com>
>>>>>>>> eghm627 at mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the ad hoc group full proposal coming before GA tonight is now on
>>>>>>>> GA blog, here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <http://www.occupyboston.org/general-assembly/><http://www.occupyboston.org/general-assembly/><http://www.occupyboston.org/general-assembly/><http://www.occupyboston.org/general-assembly/><http://www.occupyboston.org/general-assembly/>
>>>>>>>> http://www.occupyboston.org/general-assembly/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i will propose we talk about what our GA blog page should look like
>>>>>>>> and do as part of our FWG agenda today.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With peace,
>>>>>>>> Jorge Alvarez
>>>>>>>> <eghm627 at mac.com> <eghm627 at mac.com> <eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com>
>>>>>>>> eghm627 at mac.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This email was composed on a mobile device.  Please excuse any
>>>>>>>> errors.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Facilitation mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Post: <Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>> List info:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>        Send email to:  <Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>>        Or visit:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mh%40occupyboston.org><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mh%40occupyboston.org><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mh%40occupyboston.org><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mh%40occupyboston.org><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mh%40occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mh%40occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are subscribed as: <mh at occupyboston.org> <mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org><mh at occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> mh at occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Facilitation mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Post: <Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>> List info:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>        Send email to:  <Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>>        Or visit:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are subscribed as: <mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>> mattbcarroll at yahoo.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Facilitation mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Post: <Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>> List info:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>        Send email to:  <Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>>        Or visit:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/gsjmurphy%40gmail.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/gsjmurphy%40gmail.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/gsjmurphy%40gmail.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/gsjmurphy%40gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/gsjmurphy%40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are subscribed as: <gsjmurphy at gmail.com> <gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com><gsjmurphy at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> gsjmurphy at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Facilitation mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Post: <Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>> List info:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>        Send email to:  <Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>>        Or visit:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/arieloboston%40gmail.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/arieloboston%40gmail.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/arieloboston%40gmail.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/arieloboston%40gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/arieloboston%40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are subscribed as: <arieloboston at gmail.com><arieloboston at gmail.com><arieloboston at gmail.com><arieloboston at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> arieloboston at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Facilitation mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Post: <Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>> List info:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>        Send email to:  <Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>>        Or visit:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/eghm627%40mac.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/eghm627%40mac.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/eghm627%40mac.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/eghm627%40mac.com>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/eghm627%40mac.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are subscribed as: <eghm627 at mac.com> <eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com><eghm627 at mac.com>
>>>>>>>> eghm627 at mac.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Facilitation mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Post: <Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>> List info:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>         Send email to:
>>>>>>>> <Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>>> Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>>         Or visit:
>>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/richlevyus%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/richlevyus%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/richlevyus%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/richlevyus%40yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/richlevyus%40yahoo.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are subscribed as: <richlevyus at yahoo.com><richlevyus at yahoo.com><richlevyus at yahoo.com><richlevyus at yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>> richlevyus at yahoo.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Facilitation mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Post: <Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>> Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>> List info:
>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation>
>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>>        Send email to:  <Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>>> Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>>        Or visit:
>>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com>
>>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/mattbcarroll%40yahoo.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are subscribed as: <mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com><mattbcarroll at yahoo.com>
>>>>>>> mattbcarroll at yahoo.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Facilitation mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Post: <Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>> Facilitation at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>> List info: <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation>
>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/facilitation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>>>        Send email to:  <Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>>>> Facilitation-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>>>         Or visit:
>>>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/cmagid%40gmail.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/cmagid%40gmail.com><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/cmagid%40gmail.com>
>>>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/facilitation/cmagid%40gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are subscribed as: <cmagid at gmail.com> <cmagid at gmail.com><cmagid at gmail.com>
>>>>>> cmagid at gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Consensus mailing list
>>>>
>>>> Post: <Consensus at lists.occupyboston.org><Consensus at lists.occupyboston.org><Consensus at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>> Consensus at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>> List info: <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/consensus><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/consensus><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/consensus>
>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/consensus
>>>>
>>>> To Unsubscribe
>>>>        Send email to:   <Consensus-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Consensus-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org><Consensus-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org>
>>>> Consensus-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>>>        Or visit:
>>>> <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/consensus/consensus%40occupyboston.org><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/consensus/consensus%40occupyboston.org><https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/consensus/consensus%40occupyboston.org>
>>>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/consensus/consensus%40occupyboston.org
>>>>
>>>> You are subscribed as: <consensus at occupyboston.org><consensus at occupyboston.org><consensus at occupyboston.org>
>>>> consensus at occupyboston.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/private/consensus/attachments/20120424/1c7516bb/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Consensus mailing list