Hello,

I am sorry it has taken me so long to respond. I have been very ill and in quite a lot of pain.

First, I want to address the misinformation that is being shared out by Eric.

During the vote it was delegates only who were in the room. This means that the list Eric sent out of people were not in the room at the time of the vote for Jake. However, Eric was in the room when the vote happened as a delegate. Why Eric didn't raise their voice then but can do so here is unknown to me. And how he can target Jamal without including him in the conversation is troubling. However, this seems to be a repeating issue. A few weeks ago during a sudoroom meeting I was sent a message to ask Pallavi to leave our SudoRoom meeting. This message made me feel uncomfortable, but still I shared the request, and I regret that. That message was sent to me by Eric who was sitting at the same table as me, yet once again was unable to use his own voice. In SudoRoom right now we have a weak delegate who cannot use their own voice in meetings. That delegate is Eric. This is not because they are being silenced, but because they would rather cause issues and make puppets of others. I also personally see the stance being taken towards Paige as retaliatory and asking Paige to step down is deeply concerning. It is the exact kind of silencing of dissent that so many of the voices in this email thread seem to be so worried about. As well, Jamal did not dictate any letter, while the letter was being written me and Jamal went out and grabbed dinner. We weren't even in the same building. And finally, the request was not to keep the information secret from Jake. It was to wait until he received the letter before discussing it with him. This way it could have been clearly addressed there, and if there were questions they could be brought to Jamal.

Next, voting by consensus-minus one was decided unanimously by all delegates involved to make decisions during this meeting and move forward. This meeting was meant to address the accountability of Omni, and the due process of this meeting was decided unanimously by all delegates present. It is my understanding that even within sudoroom the vote to remove a member is the same, consensus-minus one. This process was meant to add accountability to the actions that have been taken by people within our space, and I doubt it will be the last it is used. 

My own interactions with Jake have been predominantly kind, however I have seen evidence and been told stories that deeply bother me. I can no longer defend Jake for the actions he has taken in our space. As a friend I wish Jake would have respected the decision and tried talking to Jamal as specified in the letter. Instead, I was told by several others before the letter was sent out that Jake knew about the ban already. A violation of trust taken in bad faith. To say Jake was "harshly convicted" when they are being invited back into the space after taking actions towards restorative justice that they rightfully should take to address the accountability for their own actions is quite simply absurd. And I would also like to point out that the collective with the most attending members was in fact SudoRoom. To represent this as anything else is a lie. 

Now that the misinformation shared here has been addressed, I want to move on to the discussions in this thread. I am deeply bothered by the racism in this thread, and I am deeply bothered that our emails continue to look more akin to Twitter with personal attacks and just plain old nastiness. I was your delegate for several months and many of the names on this thread I have never heard of, and some have even requested to continue to not be involved in meetings and keeping things to these emails. Do not make the requests and assumptions you are making without involvement within our space. Show up to our meetings and use your voice. Speak with us. The tensions of racism, transphobia, and misogyny are already growing enough without input from people who are not even here.

This petty infighting must stop. I am deeply disappointed by the many members here who have chosen to act in nasty and misleading ways. 

Let us focus on the true issue at hand. Omni is in deep shit. It has been poorly mismanaged and we are here after 2 year long extensions for our great big ol' loan with very little money and very little ways to change that. Jamal as an ED has given us an option to save Omni without requesting outside involvement. The delegates and those interested in making changes are exploring and making progress on our different options. Most of our meeting this weekend was making that progress and we all left with so much hope for our future as a collective of collectives. I believe in Jamal, and I believe that we can save Omni Commons by working together for a better future. 

-Jems

On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 8:15 PM E via sudo-discuss <sudo-discuss@sudoroom.org> wrote:

I have deep reservations about the actions taken at yesterday's “retreat.” I informed my co-delegate that I would be delayed by one hour and ultimately arrived at the meeting at approximately 3:30pm. Jamal, Angela, Jemma, Anwar, Silver, Patrik, Yar, Paige, Toan, and John were there in person. Our newly hired facilitator, Jamal, was dictating the above letter to Paige. Jake was not present. I was told that before I arrived, Jamal had called a vote on what accountability measure would be suitable to address “the Jake problem.” During this vote, delegates John (LL), Patrik (CCL), Paige (SR), and Natalie (SB) voted in favor of inflicting this punishment and Toan (FNB) blocked the measure. Toan’s block was overruled and the issue was then passed by consensus-minus one. Paige did not consult with or inform me that this vote was taking place. Jamal asked me to keep this information secret from Jake. I found this request objectionable as this was allegedly meant to be an open meeting.

The meeting notes on the wiki say barely anything about how and why this decision was reached. Jake was tried, convicted, and harshly sentenced - in absence - without a chance to hear any charges, defend himself or plead his case. Abandoning due process is not restorative in any way - it’s shameful - it makes the meeting seem less about accountability and more about silencing dissent.  

When I consulted with my co-delegate after the meeting, I asked if they believed that they had voted in line with the wishes of our collective - they acknowledged that they had not done so and would understand if they were asked to step down from the position. I understand that Paige was under a lot of pressure and clearly cares deeply about our community. I have great esteem for Paige and appreciation for much of the work they’ve done in our space, however, it looks like the meeting may have escalated more quickly than anyone could have expected. When I asked if it was possible to appeal this judgment I was directed to consult with Jamal.

I call upon all people of sudoroom who share my fondness for due process and distaste for secret trials to object by responding to this thread and making your views clear. Last night, judgment was passed against one of our members without that person even being present, and fundamental structural changes were made to our organization without consultation of the general membership.     

-Eric

Sudoroom Co-delegate

_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list -- sudo-discuss@sudoroom.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sudo-discuss-leave@sudoroom.org
More options at https://sudoroom.org/lists/postorius/lists/sudo-discuss.sudoroom.org/

_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list -- sudo-discuss@sudoroom.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sudo-discuss-leave@sudoroom.org
More options at https://sudoroom.org/lists/postorius/lists/sudo-discuss.sudoroom.org/