[OSList] Creating Space or Opening Space?

[Lucas Cioffi via OSList]

That's an interesting thread you started, Daniel, about inviting
non-invitation.

Harrison writes yesterday:

> Here’s a thought... Space/time is infinite, defined by our minds, and
> limited by our imagination. So “constraints” are only what you make them
> out to be. AND... it is always nice to have as much “space/time” as
> possible. A “genuine invitation” creates a LOT of space/time.
>

*Do y'all think we are creating space or are we opening space?  It's an
important distinction, because creating implies a win-win but opening could
be a win-lose situation.  *I'd say none of us is ever creating space, just
opening it, and that someone or something is always losing something else
when we do.

*I'll do my best to explain...*
Instead of "creating space" I'd argue that instead we are "creating space
*for*" because the space literally already exists.  We are creating
opportunity for voices to be heard and for people to participate.  But in
some indirect way a *space for X* is at least indirectly a *space against Y*.
We are never actually creating new space, instead we are creating "*new
space for*" by marking that space with an invitation/purpose, principles,
and a law of two feet.  The space (the hotel conference room, the
warehouse, etc) already exists.

I don't disagree, Harrison, that overall space/time might be infinite–I
don't know :) –but each of us is limited to being in one physical space at
a time, monitoring/interacting with a handful of physical spaces virtually,
and having 24 hours in a day.  In that way we'd all agree that space and
time are nearly zero sum at a personal scale, so when we open/create space
for _________, and people accept the invitation, we are decreasing energy
and time spent some where else.  There is a cost.  We don't talk about
that, but I don't think we forget that either.

So, to take this argument full circle (pun intended), I'd say that whenever
we open space, we do it by force.  Space doesn't open on its own (or does
it?!-- what if we aren't really *opening* space and the space is already
open, that we're just the first to see it?).  Well, even if space opens on
its own and then if we're the first ones to walk into it and invite others,
we are still inviting by force–this not a bad force or a coercive force,
but it's a force nonetheless.  We know this, because we know how it
requires force to launch an invitation into the world.  (Or is this not
always the case?  Can someone invite by simply being?)

Any invitation displaces people's time: to read it (maybe just 30 seconds)
and then much more time is displaced for people choose to attend (an hour,
a day, etc).  What I'm trying to say is that I'm beginning to see opening
space more and more as active, forceful (in a good way), and intentional.
When we open space that was previously closed, we are using force, and that
might mean that someone else is experiencing something else closing (the
old order of business in an organization or fewer people attending another
event or doing something that they would have otherwise been doing if they
weren't attending).

Bottom line: It's hard to argue with creating space because it looks like a
win-win, but somewhere someone or something is losing our time, energy, and
support in the short term.  In the case of an organization the person
losing is the boss who wants to keep the old order of things.  When that
situation isn't applicable, we're at least spending time away from other
things we could be doing such as tending to a vegetable garden or taking
Fido for a walk.  *So it's always important to keep in mind who/what is
losing when we open space, and perhaps using the phrase "creating space" is
a good way to focus on the upside.*

Lucas Cioffi
Founder, QiqoChat.com
Charlottesville, VA
Mobile: 917-528-1831
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20150902/b28b034e/attachment.htm>