Not sure you actually accomlished "Against," <span></span>Harold. I think I just read OST is life, a finite slice of Life. <div><br></div><div>And if the conversation happens in a room full of people who think and talk about games, that's great to say OST is a game cuz everyone in that room or community knows what that means. Probably doesn't work as well on CNN or at an ODN mtg. </div>
<div><br></div><div>I guess it still a bit confusing to me if this conversation is about how to talk OST in agile community or how to talk OST in other/larger communities. Translation is always possible, but the game lingo doesn't seem native to the folks I'm usually talking with. Actually, finding some native understanding of (and native language for) OS seems like half the game in many instances. </div>
<div><br></div><div>m</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br>On Wednesday, October 9, 2013, Harold Shinsato wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>Harrison,<br>
<br>
Ok, I'll take your word from previous posts that I won't be in
trouble if I risk going up against you again - or maybe it's just
a hope that this thread won't be shut down due to
misunderstandings.<br>
<br>
The statement "OST is a game" actually doesn't work for me so much
because it uncomfortably reduces all the ideas and philosophy (and
practice) of OST into a word that unfortunately has for many
negative connotations. But perhaps I'll invite thinking about OST
*as* a game instead. Perhaps that can help prevent cognitive
dissonance and allow for this conversation to continue.<br>
<br>
My understanding of the word game as used by Daniel Mezick and
others comes from game theory - and could open up many benefits.<br>
<br>
The briefest way I think to hope to keep this particular door open
for those in this community who might find the word game
unpleasant would be to suggest the book "Finite and Infinite
Games: A Vision of Life as Play and Possibility" by James P.
Carse. Mr. Carse actually is a professor of history and literature
of religion - and his thinking in that book is very poetic and
beautiful. And it reminds me much of Open Space thinking - and I
won't even attempt to dive into his thesis any more than to look
at what I think sums up the thinking being the final sentence in
the book. "There is only one infinite game."<br>
<br>
The bigger game of Open Space is the game of life - the unending
story - the "one infinite game". And an OST meeting or conference
is a finite game which seems to open up an experience of the
infinite game in a beautiful way. And yet, there's still value in
seeing the finite game aspects of OST in that context.<br>
<br>
Alas, perhaps this attempt will be futile. But I hold out hope
that others won't be discouraged from this perspective on OST as a
game and it's benefits.<br>
<br>
Harold<br>
<br>
On 10/7/13 1:25 PM, Harrison Owen wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Dan
– Using the word, “game” as you do, I guess it sort of works
with OS, but I do confess a certain feeling of cognitive
dissonance, which I suspect may be shared by some of my
colleagues. In any event, it certainly would not be a word I
would use. But that doesn’t mean a great deal. However, when
you say, “Leaders choose to play OST. Or not,” I do feel
called upon to say something like... Oh Yes? <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Some
people refer to the “Game of Life,” but it is scarcely a
game you choose to play (or not). Not playing is called
suicide, I think, and while some people do make that choice
it is not a choice that most folks would considered good,
useful, or positive. It is more like canceling all choices.
Out of the Game, so to speak.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">I
feel rather the same way about OS, and for all the same
reasons. OS for me is not a process we choose to do or not
do – quite simply it is what we are -- Self organizing, and
OS is only an invitation to be ourselves fully and
purposefully. We can chose to be ourselves with distinction,
despair, or something in between -- but so long as we
remain on the planet in some viable form, we got no choice.
We are what we are, what we are. Put a little differently,
OS is not something new and different, it is just a small
name change for what has been around for quite a while:
life. I guess you can call it a game, but somehow that
seems to miss some of the nuances.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Harrison
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span><br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div>-- <br>
Harold Shinsato<br>
<a href="javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'harold@shinsato.com');" target="_blank">harold@shinsato.com</a><br>
<a href="http://shinsato.com" target="_blank">http://shinsato.com</a><br>
twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/hajush" target="_blank">@hajush</a></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br><br>-- <br>Michael Herman<br>MichaelHerman.com<br>(312) 280-7838 <p>Sent from my iPhone<br></p>