<html>
At 08:39 AM 9/5/2002 -0700, Chris C. wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>I have always sort of steered away
from Open Space as a way of actually<br>
making decisions, mostly because I couldn't see how it might happen,
but<br>
this conversation is clarifying some things for me and opening some<br>
doors.<br><br>
So, I might ask, is it too far to go to say that in the heart of
what<br>
you are saying we can use the process to actually get some
decisions?<br>
How would we do that? What might be the benefits and
pitfalls?</blockquote><br>
Somebody said -- "Life is all about making choices." I think
the same is true for OS. This may or may not mean voting, but choices get
made. Choosing may be a matter of NOT bringing up an issue. Or the issue
may come up and nobody chooses to discuss it. Or, the issue may come up,
people show up, and discover that The Issue was a simple
misunderstanding. The group recognizes that when it is over it is over,
and chooses to go on to something else. Choices.<br><br>
For me, the balloting procedure (to avoid the awful word
"voting") I use at the end simply allows people to objectify
their choices. There may be nothing further to do, or a lot -- so the
result is not always an "action plan" -- unless the need is to
do nothing.<br><br>
Having said all of the above -- one thing I would definitely stay away
from is the sort of thing you mention Chris -- where the range of choices
is pre-determined. That just closes the space. So OS can never be a
replacement for the legislative process (Congress, Parliament etc) -- At
the end of the day, those folks have to vote something up or down. The
mistake I think we are making in all our participatory democracies is to
think that Congress/Parliament is the ONLY thing. I see it as the end of
the line, dealing with things that can't get decided in better ways, or
confirming decisions that have all ready been made by the people. This of
course means that the people have to take an active part in the process
-- hold what I call Civil Conversations about their situation. Failing
that the people will get what they will get -- which seems to be what is
happening at the moment. The temptation is to blame the politicians. I
think that is wrong. They are just doing what they are paid for. But the
people have abdicated. And those who abdicate can't bitch.<br><br>
I see Open Space as a marvelous way of holding those essential Civil
Conversations -- which are the essential underpinnings of any well
functioning Democracy. Open Space wherever, however about whatever -- let
the people speak. This puts the People back in play and I think the
results could be amazing. Of course, the notion of Civil Conversations is
not my invention. The New England Town Meeting was/is such a thing. And
the various public forum are (generally) weak attempts to do the same
thing. In most cases, I find all that too slow, too costly, and not
terribly effective. We know OS can do better, and I think we have an
obligation to let it loose. Whenever, however, and wherever
possible.<br><br>
Harrison <br><br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<div align="center">Harrison Owen<br>
7808 River Falls Drive<br>
Potomac, MD 20854 USA<br>
phone 301-365-2093<br>
Open Space Training
<a href="http://www.openspaceworld.com/" eudora="autourl">www.openspaceworld.com</a>
<br>
Open Space Institute <a href="http://www.openspaceworld.org/" eudora="autourl">www.openspaceworld.org</a><br>
Personal website <a href="http://www.mindspring.com/~owenhh" eudora="autourl">www.mindspring.com\~owenhh</a><br><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><u>OSLIST@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU<br>
</u></font>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,<br>
view the archives of <font color="#0000FF"><u>oslist@listserv.boisestate.edu<br>
</u></font>Visit: <a href="http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html" eudora="autourl"><font color="#0000FF"><u>http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html</a><br><br>
<br><br>
</font></u></div>
</html>