[OSList] Sauna Space

Thu Jul 14 14:33:24 PDT 2011

Michael wrote: “"The Fifth Principle"  ...sounds like the title of a book
waiting to be written!”

Could be – but I think I might have some problem with Peter Senge (The Fifth
Discipline). J

Truth of the matter is that I am really “off” books. Don’t have the time or
the energy. But surely there are many books to be written (blogs, etc). I am
more than content to toss out some curious thoughts with the hope that
somebody will rise to the bait. Will you?

And if not this one – some other and better. I really believe we are at the
edge of some incredible breakthroughs. Different world out there requiring
different ways of thinking and new areas of thought. Just beginning and just
getting better. There is no longer any useful place for further
considerations of how to design and control systems. We have several
libraries full of all of that. Next stop begins with the recognition that we
live in a self organizing world. Organizing self organizing systems is, in
truth, not only an oxymoron, but also a waste of time. We must start with
the reality of self-organization and then use our heads to find useful ways
to maximize that opportunity. Flow with the river, and then build upon the
flow. As old as Sun Tzu – and contemporary as the next moment. That is where
the action is, I believe.

Have fun!

Harrison

Harrison Owen

7808 River Falls Dr.

Potomac, MD 20854

USA

189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer)

Camden, Maine 20854

Phone 301-365-2093

(summer)  207-763-3261

www.openspaceworld.com

www.ho-image.com (Personal Website)

To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST
Go to:
<http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org>
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

From: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
[mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of Michael Herman
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 10:04 AM
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Subject: Re: [OSList] Sauna Space

...It would be interesting to think of the analogues to “Sauna Space,” over
time and around the world. I suspect we would quickly find that opening
space is by no means a unique occupation confined to that esoteric group
known as the Open Space Community. It is a natural act and been going on
forever. As we recall with the 5th Principle, “Wherever it happens is the
right place.”

"The Fifth Principle"  ...sounds like the title of a book waiting to be
written!

--

Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
312-280-7838 (mobile)

http://MichaelHerman.com
http://ManorNeighbors.com
http://OpenSpaceWorld.org

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:

Mikk --  Sauna Space
Delightful! A powerful reminder that we did not invent
or create Open Space. It has been around ever since. Which only makes sense
when we remember that the opening in our time/space creates the natural and
essential opportunity for the resetting and renewal of the Complex Adaptive
System – which is us. Self organization has been the way of nature from the
beginning and people everywhere and  in all the times have had to deal with
it. Consciously or unconsciously, we live our lives in a self organizing
world and “adjustment spaces” are essential. It would be interesting to
think of the analogues to “Sauna Space,” over time and around the world. I
suspect we would quickly find that opening space is by no means a unique
occupation confined to that esoteric group known as the Open Space
Community. It is a natural act and been going on forever. As we recall with
the 5th Principle, “Wherever it happens is the right place.”

Harrison  

Harrison Owen

7808 River Falls Dr.

Potomac, MD 20854

USA

189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer)

Camden, Maine 20854

Phone 301-365-2093

(summer)  207-763-3261

www.openspaceworld.com

www.ho-image.com (Personal Website)

To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST
Go to:http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

From: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
[mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of Mikk Sarv
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:10 AM
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Subject: Re: [OSList] A tale of two companies/Dissolving Power

Reading this I recalled our centuries old tradition of sauna. Every Saturday
afternoon the time flow was disrupted. The name for Saturday in our language
was half-day - 'puulpäiv'. All went to sauna naked - men and women, rich and
poor, old and young, without distinction. The general rule was that one
should never refuse to offer to whoever comes drinking water from well and
sauna, when it was heated.

Besides cleaning in hot temperature the sauna was alos place for inside
cleansing. Unsolved issues were addressed and discussed, perhaps like in
swetlodge tradition among American native people. 

Now I understand, that this tradition enabled people to open space
regularily and to solve issues, to enable and to make use of the
self-regulation process.

Thanks for interesting thread!

Mikk Sarv

2011/7/10 Peggy Holman <peggy at peggyholman.com>

Harrison,

To your point, at the second Biotech OS that I did, a constant theme was "we
are facing the same issues that we have been for years with no resolution".
Well, beyond just declaring that they were going to do it differently this
time, in the closing circle, one of the managers said that a group of them
had gotten together at lunch and taken on one of those chronic issues.  They
came to a new and easily implementable solution.  He declared it the most
productive 10 minutes in years.  Think about it...ten minutes to resolve an
issue that had been stuck for years!  (Of course, the preceding day and a
half of time together in Open Space made that 10 minutes viable.)

Harrison has already eloquently spoken to what made the difference, starting
with this powerful observation:

In Open Space the total intelligence and experience of the assembled body,
which was immense, was cut loose to deal with the issues, not in a linear
sequential fashion, but in a simultaneous, multi-tasking environment which
was simply white hot. 

The Open Space disrupted business as usual, creating the space in which they
ran into their own frustrations head on.  And they had the room to do
something about it because of the shift in the relationships that comes from
the "random encounters" of who gets to interact with whom.  Further, the
space was an invitation to be pioneers, together facing their shared issues.
And when the habitual conflicts around stuck areas surfaced ("we know who
owns the xyz function"), they took on the dysfunctions and came to
agreements that none could have done on their own or in a linear fashion.

Peggy

On Jul 10, 2011, at 6:20 AM, Harrison Owen wrote:

Artur – I would never suggest that Power is somehow absent in Open Space or
as you say, “dissolves.” In fact my experience is just the opposite. When
space is opened and the people really get to work, the ambient power is, for
me, truly awesome. Indeed the flow and focus of Power is vastly more
effective, may I say “powerful,” than is ordinarily experienced in the
“normal” organizational setting, including such places as IBM at it
autocratic best/worst. For example, I once had a large IBM consulting group
(250 people) in a 2 day Open Space. They were facing a complex of technical
issues which they had been struggling with for several years to no avail.
Their approach to that point had been standard IBM procedure. The senior
executive and his management team planned everything with precision, they
carefully organized the working groups and tightly controlled their process
– in a fashion you are well familiar with.J The result had been two years of
constant failure and near misses. All of this changed in Open Space.
Precisely the same group of people managed to deal with the same group of
issues in an elegant fashion, productive of workable solutions – in 2 days.

The difference was embarrassingly obvious, and in fact there were a few red
faces in the management team, but one could scarcely argue with success. But
what was the cause of the difference? It was surely not the absence of Power
– but rather the way Power manifests and was utilized. Under the “old rules”
Power is concentrated at the “top” and then passed on down the line in small
dribbles and drabs. The problem was that the whole mechanism was so
cumbersome and slow that when the external conditions changed or new
technologies emerged, which they did constantly and quickly, the “elegant
design and process” was left in the dust. One more failure or near miss.

In Open Space the total intelligence and experience of the assembled body,
which was immense, was cut loose to deal with the issues, not in a linear
sequential fashion, but in a simultaneous, multi-tasking environment which
was simply white hot. And the power flow was brilliant – but the locus and
focus of that power shifted constantly from group to group, individual to
individual. Mapping that flow would have been an interesting study, but the
study would always have been multiple steps behind the reality – and any
pretence of prediction would have been doomed to failure.  Too quick, too
complex, mind blowing. Playing by the old rules was not a possibility, and
from the view point of those rules, what happened was simply impossible,
which was the source of redness on the faces of the Management team.

Of course, what happened is a common experience in Open Space – not because
of the magic of Open Space but rather the power of the underlying force of
any well functioning self organizing system which we did not design, create,
and certainly don’t “run.” It is the “natural” way. Obviously we can choose
to go a different way – and many do just that. And the results speak for
themselves. Making such a choice always mystifies me, but it clear that many
folks would rather maintain the illusion of “Being in Control” at the
expense of effectiveness and profitability. But that is a choice.

There is a place for formal structure and controls, but I think that place
is a small one, useful for defining boundaries and identity. But it is a
lousy way to run a business, or at least a very ineffective way. I often
think of the Formal system as the ossified residue of the last
self-organization. Rather like the Lobster’s shell which works quite well
until things change – the lobster grows. I have written rather extensively
about all this in Wave Rider, if you are interested.

Harrison

Harrison Owen

7808 River Falls Dr.

Potomac, MD 20854

USA

189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer)

Camden, Maine 20854

Phone 301-365-2093

(summer)  207-763-3261

www.openspaceworld.com

www.ho-image.com (Personal Website)

To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST
Go to:http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

From: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
[mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of Artur Silva
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 11:51 PM
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Subject: Re: [OSList] A tale of two companies

Peggy, Harrison, Suzanne, David, Doug and Chris:

I ended last Friday a very intensive work period, to finish the first (and
bigger) phase of my students' examinations and submitting a paper to a
Conference. In the meanwhile, I have read the first marvelous initial post
of this thread from Peggy, and the interesting answers that followed.

After Peggy's first mail I had the intention - but not the time - to write
some comments. This afternoon, when I had the time, I reread everything, but
before beginning to write I have received all the careful answers that Peggy
sent to each of the comments.

Now it is almost all said, and my comment is only concerned with a small
point where this thread relates with the paper I wrote, namely the
importance of Power and Care (that I prefer to "Love") in the tech company's
experience Peggy shared with us.

As many of you know, I have been struggling, after some years, with two
related questions:

1) first, how can we create the "Patterns of a Learning Architecture" for a
company (or other organization) so that it can learn faster and more
profoundly than other organizations, especially in what concerns questions
of generative (double-loop) learning, and namely when "sensible questions"
are at stake? In other words: how can we change the learning patterns of a
company (which usually have strong learning disabilities) if and when that
change is possible? (which btw assumes that it is not always possible...)

2) Second, what is - or can be - the role of OST in all of this?

Of course, one can always say that power doesn't exist at all, or that "you
never have to let go of it, because you never had it in the first place" (I
am paraphrasing a recent answer from Harrison to Eleder's "Quote").  

Or, at least, we can say that, in many situations we all know of, Power can
be kind of "dissolved" in the OST event(s) - in a way that it can't be in
other more "directive approaches", like "team building", to give only one
example.

But what happens in those situations were power doesn't "dissolve"? (Having
worked 20 years for IBM, I know a lot of situations where the best
intentions of senior professionals and middle managers couldn't change what
was decided "at the Top".)

And what happens in those situations where it is not even good for the
future of the organization that power dissolves too quickly, as the "person
in charge" has a more clear and compassionate vision that the people that
contest her/him, even if - or especially when - those ones are the majority?

Any comments?

Best regards from late night in Lisbon

Artur

  _____  

From: Peggy Holman <peggy at peggyholman.com>
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
<oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
Sent: Sat, July 9, 2011 9:31:55 PM
Subject: Re: [OSList] A tale of two companies

Hi Chris,

I have followed up with my client.  To paraphrase a comment from the client:
when the community is part of creating the change and leadership is engaged,
the invitation may seem more authentic and therefore participating is less
of a stretch.

Ironically, the group is in the midst of a re-org, with little information
to anyone.  Based on my contact's reflections, I see no appetite to reflect
on the experience.  And I doubt there will be much, if any, forward motion.

The power dynamic was certainly an important factor.  Thanks for the
reference to Adam's work.  

Even when the agenda isn't hidden, if it is coming from the middle, as this
event demonstrated, it may well be rejected.  The group took on some real
business issues but steered clear of anything related to the power
structures.  In retrospect, that makes sense.  Management didn't open the
door to that arena.

And you're so right: when that opening appears, things will shift.  Given
the amount of denial at play, it will likely be pretty messy when it
happens.  So Engaging Emergence may well be a help!  In fact, my contact
just gave a copy to the group's manager.

Peggy

On Jul 8, 2011, at 11:50 AM, Chris Corrigan wrote:

Both Suzanne and Harrison have made some excellent reflections here...Peggy,
have you had a chance to follow up with the tech company folks?  Seems like
an important harvest from that experience is a naming of some of the things
that are holding them back.  They may choose to use OST or some other
process for these conversations, but it certainly seems apparent that
without talking about this stuff, they are not going to move forward well.  

Your story does point to an important question that I have been in recently,
and that is, how do we relate what we are doing to the realities of power in
the organization?  Adam Kahane's recent work on Power and Love has
highlighted the need to be sensitive to both the relational and the
transactional contexts at play in an organization.  Using processes like OST
is often a vote for the relational to be activated in the work, but if the
transactional power dynamics are at play, people will often behave the way
you describe.  Suzanne names it well - a well-intentioned hidden agenda -
and the effect can be that it increases mistrust and confusion and people
feel that the intervention has not actually dealt with the real issues.  

When the opening appears for THAT conversation, things will flow.  And that
is where YOUR book has much to offer around the skills of working with
emergence and disruption. 

C

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:28 PM, doug <os at footprintsinthewind.com> wrote:

Peggy and all friends--

Question 1: It was 1975 when I last lived inside a Fortune 200
corporation, so take this with a grain of salt. What came through my
sixth sense on reading this was that somehow it was not a good mix to
have both managers and field people in this particular OS. They had
different issues to be worked by.

Question 2: speaks of the same dynamic to me: a very highly controlled
group, where the inside circle did not want interlopers, or were so
perceived.

Had one company just recently acquired another in this tech company? It
feels we/they to me.

Hopefully this gives a bit of a different echo from the hills across the
way.

                       :- Doug.

On Sat, 2011-07-02 at 16:29 -0700, Peggy Holman wrote:
> In the last few months, I opened space at a tech company and a biotech
> company. On one level, they looked similar: one functional area,
> international participation, a mix of managers and individual
> contributors.
>
> Yet the experiences and the outcomes couldn't have been more
> different!  I'll describe the two events and my reflections on what
> made the difference between them.
>
> Note: I wrote the story about the tech immediately following the Open
> Space but didn't have a chance to edit and send it before the second
> experience. You'll see a couple of questions that the experience
> raised for me embedded in the story.  They took on a little different
> light following the second experience.
>
> Corporate dynamics at play in a technology company...
>
> This OS was with an international sales and marketing meeting for the
> launch of a new year. Day 1 was not in Open Space.  It was a manager’s
> only session, using a mix of conversational forms (a huge stretch for
> the power point, info-out culture). It went well. People appreciated
> talking rather than just listening.  Many of the field people
> acknowledged the quality of listening from headquarters people who
> usually do most of the talking.
>
> On the first afternoon, the larger meeting – 100 people – began with a
> conversation between execs and the people in the room. A great, candid
> conversation.
>
> On day 2, we opened the space. During the Open Space, I ran into a
> several issues that I haven't experienced before and wondered if
> others have.
>
> Overall, it was a terrific day. And one of the unexpected dynamics
> surfaced: the managers didn't feel complete with the conversations
> that they wanted just amongst themselves. And they didn't feel they
> had the space for their private conversation in the Open Space. My
> client caught wind of the situation as they planned to organize a
> session during day 3's action planning/next step breakout session
> time. That meant the management layer wouldn't be part of action
> planning/next step conversations.
>
> We negotiated having the manager session posted in the context of
> action planning/next steps so that it would be visible even if not
> open to everyone. In practice, it was announced but not posted.
>
> We added a second action oriented round of breakout sessions in the
> afternoon following a short briefing of what came out of the morning
> group to fit the timing of the manager’s session,  It made room for
> managers or others to host more action/next step sessions.
>
> So question 1: have others run into the managers-only dynamic?  If so,
> how have you dealt with it?  Are there questions you use in your
> pre-work for the OS to surface the issue and deal with it in advance?
> We thought we had handled the need with the pre-meeting among
> managers. What signs might have tipped us off to the need for more?
>
> The second dynamic completely blindsided me. Normally the second
> morning of an OS just buzzes!  Perhaps it was the party the night
> before but the group was really subdued. When I opened the space for
> action, no one came forward. Given the energy in the room, I had the
> sense that an elephant was sitting there untouched. I asked if anyone
> would speak to what was up. Someone said they didn't want to step on
> headquarter people's toes by proposing action sessions that were
> really HQ responsibilities. The exec in the room encouraged people to
> do so, saying that HQ was there to serve the field's needs.
> Ultimately, five sessions on topics of importance were posted.
>
> After the meeting, my client said she thought the reluctance came from
> a pattern of headquarters taking field input and having the
> suggestions disappear without any feedback on what happened to the
> ideas or why. So why should field people offer anything?
>
> I got the impression that the field saw it as the responsibility of
> headquarters people to take the lead. And the HQ people already felt
> full up so they weren't stepping in. Plus, people didn't see a need
> for action sessions since they felt they’d been identifying actions
> throughout the Open Space.
>
> Question 2: Given that tension between field and headquarters is
> common, have others run into this sort of reluctance to post action
> sessions? Might we have anticipated this perception before it put a
> damper on things?
>
> It was one of the only Open Space gatherings I've ever done in which
> people didn't come away saying, "Wow! Best meeting I've ever
> attended."  Instead, we heard from many that the meeting was too open
> and confusing. People wanted to hear more from the senior managers
> about what was on their minds.  I left the experience pondering the
> dynamics that led to that outcome.  The contrast with this second
> meeting helped me identify some possibilities.
>
>
>
> High times in a biotech...
>
> The work was part of a company-wide change initiative. The senior
> manager was its host.  He was actively involved. For example, he
> opened the meeting by speaking of his aspirations for the department.
> He also said a few words at morning announcements and evening news on
> each of the two days.
>
> Like the tech company, this session was basically one function --
> human resources -- with a few others invited for spice. Also similar
> to the tech meeting, people came from around the world.
>
> The meeting was a hit!  People instantly leaped out to post sessions.
> With about 100 participants, more than 50% posted something. I don't
> think I've ever had a group that size post in that ratio. The
> conversations were rich and useful. Along with the variety of topics,
> people worked through issues around organizational levels as well as
> field/headquarters dynamics.  At least three Open Space meetings
> resulted, to be hosted by different attendees over the coming
> weeks. In fact, I was invited to help with one of them.
>
> One other aspect of this session: I ran a workshop before and after
> the OS for about a half a dozen internal people to support them in
> opening space in the organization. We also met to reflect on the
> experience before morning announcements and after evening news during
> the Open Space.  In other words, they had already adopted Open Space
> as a key element of how they wanted to work. The organization is
> investing in a group of people to support creating a conversational
> culture.
>
> At a second OS I did with them a few weeks later, we brought most of
> the new practitioners together to continue to learn together. It's
> wonderful because they now have an internal community of practice to
> support each other.
>
> I was grateful to have the biotech meeting on the heels of the
> technology meeting! I went from questioning what I thought I knew to
> having some ideas of what created the differences in the experiences.
>
>
> Reflections on the differences that made a difference
>
> The biotech was committed to changing their culture and open to new
> ways of working. The OS was focused on the group envisioning how it
> can best perform its role in the company in light of those changes.
> The tech company meeting was more of a “stealth action” by a mid-level
> individual contributor familiar with Open Space. She was seeding the
> idea of a conversational culture.  In other words, the biotech event
> occurred in fertile soil, the tech company event was breaking up the
> hardpan.
>
> At the biotech, the sponsor was a senior manager who was explicit
> about using the event to spark culture change.  His whole team
> participated throughout the event so there was no issue around hearing
> what senior people were thinking. They were in the room. In contrast,
> the tech company host was a mid-level individual contributor. She is
> highly trusted and used her influence to bring Open Space in.  Her
> goal was to take steps towards creating a more conversational
> culture. Both intentions are valid. They just created different
> experiences.
>
> At the biotech, the sponsor had used Open Space at a previous
> organization as part of a successful culture change initiative. He
> "got" the simplicity of Open Space, not even feeling a need for an
> action round.  Instead, as part of session notes, we asked people to
> include both a discussion and a "next steps/commitments" section. That
> dealt with one of the disconnects in the tech company meeting.  They
> were confused when I re-opened the space for action, saying they had
> been naming actions throughout. The biotech meeting helped me see that
> re-opening the space for action turned out to be an unnecessary thing
> to do.
>
> The biotech meeting was offsite, so even those who were stretched by
> the Open Space stuck around because it was a big effort to leave.
> That gave them time to warm to the experience over the two days.  The
> tech company meeting was onsite, making it easy for the senior
> managers and others to show up briefly and leave.
>
> Finally, the biotech is thriving and growing while the tech company is
> really struggling to rediscover its identity. This external factor
> strikes me as a key difference in the environments.
>
> So what does it all mean?  I would still Open Space in the tech
> company.  There were plenty of people who found the experience
> worthwhile, even if their feedback was quieter than those who were
> frustrated or confused. I believe we prepared the soil for a few seeds
> to take root.
>
> For the tech company to take further steps, it strikes me that the
> person who hosted the Open Space would benefit from finding informal
> partners, other inside change agents.  I like to believe that even
> without strong leadership support, she can make a dent.  As the
> biotech company shows, management involvement can be an accelerator.
>  Still, as I think about what someone sitting in the middle of an
> organization can do, enlisting partners who share interest in creating
> a conversational culture could be a way to continue to move forward.
>  By forming an informal community of learners, she can create a system
> of support.
>
> Could we have done better?  No doubt.  I look forward to any thoughts
> you have.
>
> Appreciatively,
>
> Peggy
>
>
>
> _________________________________
> Peggy Holman
> peggy at peggyholman.com
>
>
> 15347 SE 49th Place
> Bellevue, WA  98006
> 425-746-6274
> www.peggyholman.com <http://www.peggyholman.com/> 
> www.journalismthatmatters.org <http://www.journalismthatmatters.org/> 
>
>
> Enjoy the award winning Engaging Emergence: Turning Upheaval into
> Opportunity
>
> "An angel told me that the only way to step into the fire and not get
> burnt, is to become
> the fire".
>   -- Drew Dellinger
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> _______________________________________________
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:

> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:

http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

-- 
CHRIS CORRIGAN
Facilitation - Training - Process Design
Open Space Technology

Weblog: http://www.chriscorrigan.com/parkinglot
Site: http://www.chriscorrigan.com/

upcoming Art of Hosting retreats:

Bowen Island, BC
<http://berkana.org/berkana/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&secti
onid=14&id=375&Itemid=525>  - October 23 - 26th

Saskatchewan
<http://berkana.org/berkana/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&secti
onid=14&id=370&Itemid=516>  - September 19 - 22nd

_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20110714/f25ce353/attachment-0008.htm>