baskets, containers, sponsorship, & the quality of the space

Ted Ernst ted at chicagohumanist.org
Sat Apr 3 08:37:38 PST 2004


I've been mostly a lurker and sometimes a poster for the very few voluntary
open spaces I've worked on, and I haven't read every word of this
conversation about the archives, but I have a question that I can't answer
myself.

How does a community express its will?  How does one achieve consensus of
present and past members of this list (community, if you will)?

When there's a sponsor that can set the givins, maybe these questions are
easier.  If you don't want to participate in that community, you don't.  In
a totally self-organized community like this one, there is no sponsor that
has this kind of power (or maybe someone's acting as this sponsor?), so how
does the group itself define itself?

Just questions about how we build a small piece of what we're all building
"out there."

peace,
ted
___
Humanize the Earth! http://www.chicagohumanist.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Birgitt Williams
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 8:59 AM
> To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> Subject: Re: baskets, containers, sponsorship, & the quality
> of the space
>
>
> Chris,
> Your metaphor of a basket is a great one, as is the look at
> this list from the perspective of paralleling an OST meeting.
> I too resonate with an understanding that a healthy living
> system has mechanisms for looking after itself including
> having a skin or container. Some containers are so large that
> the container is the universe. Others are smaller. If the
> container via 'givens' had been in place, we all would have
> known what this space is for and what it is not rather than
> living in the world of assumptions. This also would have
> assisted Michael Herman in his leadership role with the list
> and the website. All containers created by the theme
> (purpose) and the 'givens' are containers that change over
> time in accordance with the organism. Change over time is a
> community process with agreements by the community, a
> collaborative approach.
>
> Others have also contributed great value to this discussion
> and I extend my thanks.
>
> For me, the quality of space on this list is dependent on
> defining a. purpose of who we are as a community ie: is this
> a community or is it a think tank from which ideas are to be
> harvested. If it is the former, one kind of space is open. If
> it is the latter, it is a different quality of space. b.
> identification and agreement about the 'givens' for this
> list. There are unlikely to be many, givens get revisted over
> time because they change. Clarifying the givens clarifies the
> space that is open, what it is open for so that those who
> participate can do so with informed consent. Thank you Ashley
> for your suggestion of how to do this. c. a decision making
> process for this community. Decisions have been made on this
> list and whether they have been in the hands of a few or
> perceived to be in the hands of a few, for sure decisions
> have been made that have affected all on the list (present,
> past, future) without checking for the will of the community
> d. a decision to be made by this community about the archives
> of the list being open to being searched by the search
> engines of the world wide web (and they continue to get more
> sophisticated). The decision would need to be made for
> achives up to the present being available this way. Another
> decision could be that any materials generated from this
> point forward would be available as archives to the world
> wide web search engines
>
> Michael H, I appreciate that you were in a difficult although
> well intentioned postion as a result of your decision to open
> the archives to the world wide web search engines. In the
> early days of the list, prior to even Harrison joining it,
> people like myself were extremely active on the list with
> lots of personal conversations as we worked to 'build' the
> community. I thank you for letting me know that the archives
> do not hold a record of these early days. Never-the-less, I
> agree with Marie's suggestion that we stop having the
> archives open to the search engines and reopen them only
> after a community decision making process. Because so many
> people are involved who are no longer on the list, it is wise
> to include them in this decision making. Anyone who wants to
> research the archives can end up doing so by subscribing to
> the list and so it is still open but just not as open as if
> it was searchable through the search engines. For me
> personally, with the other business ventures that I am in a
> leadership role in, I do not want my thoughts so easily
> accessible through search engines (esp as they get more
> sophisticated in their searches). I  have heard plenty on
> this list saying that it is 'too bad' for people like me who
> did not know our work was to be archived and public the way
> it is. If that is the will of the community, I will just have
> to live with it and make my decisions accordingly, but I
> would like to know that it is the will on the list rather
> than how it is currently left.
>
> Peggy, as for being someone who spoke up about a decision
> once it had been made, I wish to let you know for the
> purposes of studying this that it was a most unpleasant role,
> one I do not want to get in again on this list, and one in
> which my feelings got hurt a lot both on the list and
> off-list. You know me well enough that seeking truth is
> important to me and that I have had courage over years to
> speak out when I wanted to see something made right from my
> perspective. So, you will also know that it must have been
> very unpleasant for me to choose a future that will not have
> me repeating this role on this list or in this community.  I
> choose to stay subscribed to a community forum that has
> mattered a lot to me in the past in and which I was willing
> to put my energy but am barely hanging in there after many
> years of having been a member of this community. Some might
> see this as self organizing being successful--the voice that
> was willing to speak out with her passion and opinions being
> silenced. I am emotionally weary  of it all. I don't have
> very much passion for contributing. I will wait to feel what
> is right for me.
>
>  I wish you all joy, peace, God's grace and blessings, and
> that you prosper in all things,
>
> Birgitt
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU]On Behalf
> Of chris weaver
> Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 8:17 AM
> To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> Subject: baskets, containers, sponsorship, & the quality of the space
>
>
> (This is a re-send of my previous post (Open Space/Open
> List...) with a new subject-line for easier tracking - thank you.)
>
> Dear OSLIST Community,
>
> I am enthralled.  This thread is connecting deeply with my
> intellectual and emotional passion.  Both the specific
> list-related issues at hand and the window into deeper
> learning are important to me.  I notice as well how much I
> care about the people who are posting, and how much I care
> about so many of the people who are "listening."  I am
> grateful to be conscious anew of your presence in my life
> (via the magic of this list).
>
> Let me weave a basket - a context-container for looking at
> the discussion sparked by the open-archives issue (including
> my witnessing this morning of my friend Michael Herman
> finding himself in the HOT SEAT!)  Needless to say, this is
> not the only possible basket.  It's mine - many people's
> branches, my morning weaving :-)
>
> Christine wrote,
> > I've always considered this listserv as one giant open
> space, with the
> same
> principles and law as any OST event.
>
> This outlines the shape of my basket.  Maybe the list is like
> an OST event, maybe it's not.  Let's pretend it is.
>
> Chris Mcrae wrote,
> > as someone who knows what goes on at least 100 listserves, yours is
> > the
> most
> interesting, practical, communal, caring and open.
>
> As a metaphor for an aspect of this, Ashley Cooper wrote,
> > can you imagine walking down the street (googling) and then just
> > finding
> yourself in this community. that would be amazing! i think
> that i would immediately plop down on the street and start
> crying. someone like julie smith would walk over and put her
> arms around me and... i'd know that the dream was real.
>
> So:  the OSLIST is an uncommon virtual space, just as an OST
> event, opened and held with skill and care, provides an
> uncommon space - uncommonly responsive, inviting, creative.
> To my way of thinking:  like being inside
> -- a holographically-connected member of -- a healthy living organism.
>
> The reason I raised the question of how a healthy living
> system cares for itself is that in my experience, a healthy
> living system has a container, or a skin.  As noted in the
> wonderful responses, the skin is highly permeable - health
> depends on the thriving connection between the encoded
> information "within" the system and "outside" the system.  I
> would assert that, while close scientific or mystical
> examination reveals "within" and "outside" to be an illusion,
> the PRACTICE of skin, of containers, of definition of and
> translation across boundaries, is a requirement for taking
> part in the Big Dance.
>
> All my EXPERIENCE with OST and Open Space Organizations has
> been less about the removal of boundaries and more about a
> highly rigorous engagement with, experimentation with, and
> honoring of boundaries.  In practice, this means working with
> the givens.
>
> So.  In an OST event, who determines the givens?  In my
> experience of best practice, the givens are discovered and
> creatively articulated in conversation between the
> facilitator and the sponsor.  The sponsor, through his/her
> connection with the community being served/invited,
> articulates the givens, which join the OST
> principles/law/method to form the skin for the event - the container.
>
> The quality of what HAPPENS in the space is deeply influenced
> by the clarity, elegance, intention of the container that defines it.
>
> So, there's the basket.
>
> As for Michael Herman in the hot seat:  It appears to me that
> you are feeling the heat that sponsors, and sometimes
> facilitators, feel when participants in an OST request (and
> demand) clarity about the givens, and when they ask questions
> about who determines the givens, why, and through what authority.
>
> In your words Michael, one thing I hear is that you are
> reluctant to own the role of sponsor or facilitator of the
> OSLIST.  I can imagine why.  You never signed up (Hey, I'm
> just the volunteer tech guy!)
>
> But the reality that you have made some decisions about the
> skin of the OSLIST and its permeability is clear.  You, and
> the list administrators at Boise State, are tinkering with
> some givens.  A number of people on the list are saying, "No
> problem, it doesn't matter to me, I like the container,
> maximum permeability is desirable - go forth and do good!"
>
> Yet there are other voices too, which to me all arise from
> the legitimate desire of participants to have a clear
> understanding of, and perhaps a say in, the givens - the very
> practical elements of our container.  Therese has suggested
> that list participants be technically empowered to delete
> specific postings from the archives.  Marei has requested
> that archives be closed for now and that a participatory
> decision-making process be employed for conisdering the
> accessibility of the archives and also the FAQs.  Birgitt has
> requested clarity on who is making decisions and taking
> actions that alter the givens, and she has claimed authority
> for her own personal postings and withdrawn her consent that
> her words be openly available to search engines.
>
> To me, these <suggestions, requests, demands> remind me very
> much of legitimate concerns often directed at the SPONSOR in
> an OST event, or at the organizational leader of an open
> space oranization (and believe me Michael, I've been there).
> Even if such concerns appear to be a "minority opinion," if
> the sponsor simply brushes them off or ignores them, there is
> a resounding effect on the quality of the space, which can
> include a partial closing of the space.
>
> Thus, the awkwardness of the current circumstance.
>
> Based on my experience with Open Space, the quality of the
> space of the OSLIST from this moment on will indeed be
> influenced by our shared clarity on the question of WHO'S THE
> SPONSOR?  WHO'S THE FACILITATOR?  In other words, who
> determines the givens?
>
> It's easy to say that we're all the sponsor and the
> facilitator.  If that's the case, then the requests for a
> participative decision-making process make a lot of sense.
> Some voices have suggested that we don't need such a thing,
> it would be cumbersome, it might not even be possible.
> There's no doubt that someone or a group would need to
> shoulder the responsibility of designing and managing such a process.
>
> I am going to close this post like a big unanswered question
> mark, because I don't have an answer.  But I do have a
> personal "conclusion" to this very heart-felt message.
>
> My posting was largely inspired by Marei's, which expresses
> what I feel very well.  The container matters.  The container
> influences * the way we interact with eachother *  I do
> believe in trust, and in open sharing.  The availability of
> the archives is not an issue of great importance to me (with
> the possible exception of my posting in 2001 about using snot
> to hang posters on the wall....on the other hand, you should
> go back and read it!)
>
> What DOES matter to me very much (as you can tell) is the
> quality of the space.  I hope that the list remains a space
> that moves toward wholeness, which is impossible if the space
> is not wide open to vulnerability and passion.  A space where
> a person can plop down on the sidewalk, shed some tears, and
> receive comfort.  If the list is like an OST event (or even
> moreso, an Open Space Organization), then we need to know
> who's the sponsor, who's the facilitator, and how the very
> real responsibilities of these roles are carried and made
> manifest among us.
>
> With Love,
> Chris
>
> PS - I just read your reply Michael to Therese re: Delete
> Function - Thank you for your continuing facilitation of
> collaborative sponsorship!
>
> *
> *
> ==========================================================
> OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> ------------------------------
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
> Visit:
>
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.634 / Virus Database: 406 - Release Date: 3/18/2004

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.634 / Virus Database: 406 - Release Date: 3/18/2004

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html



More information about the OSList mailing list