Just my opinion here, not voting on anything, but in terms of my own limited and subjective experience in engaging with Almaz, it is one of witnessing Almaz quickly resorting to being a bully and engaging in personal attacks if Almaz is not in agreement or has a competing need.
Again my experience is limited, but I have only ever seen Almaz representing GCEA -- therefore, it is not clear to me at least that GCEA even has other members with equal decision-making or representational power within that collective, or even if they decide things by consensus or operates as a collective.
I don't see this as a personal conflict between Almaz and any one other particular person or group, and again although my experience is limited, it seemed to be a pattern between almaz and frankly any person / space reservation etc that Almaz saw as competing with her interests (an expression of concern, a double booking, etc). Invariably it seemed, Almaz resorted to ad-hominem attacks and insults as a means to alienate a given community member whose input Almaz did not like.
In my opinion, the duration of intentional harms that almaz has periodically meted out upon fellow members of our community (both omninoms and ppl trying to book events) in the process of all trying to collectively share space seems to me to be without equal in omni's short tenure.
What is equally profound is the routine way that the feelings and voices of those on the receiving end of almaz's behavior are dismissed by some other members of our community, as if these harmed parties are not also fellow human beings and community members worthy of our equal care and respect.
It therefore seems such bullying works most of the time, and one of several reasons why our safe space policy in my opinion remains more an ideal than a practice. I could cite chapter and verse examples of incidents to illustrate all the above points, but thats also been done before (to zero effect as I said, but). Its not like any of this is hearsay or not already on the record.
The nonpayment of rent is a problem, the issue with the event funds Im reading about seems to be very distressing indeed, but tbh all this pales in comparison to the general track record of difficulty Almaz has equitably sharing space with others as a matter of regular practice.
Surely this has to be a fundamental principle that is accepted at the group level by all member collectives of omni, as well as at the individual level by those groups' representatives. For me, its about whether omni still cares whether its important that community members actually have an obligation to treat one another with a mutual kindness and respect in the spirit of collaboration, or whether that notion is some quaint vestige from omni's early vision that doesn't really factor today.
From what I have seen at least, Almaz's approach to participation in omni has consistently been 'my way or the highway' whenever the concerns of others are voiced, and that approach is not about collaboration, horizontality, mutual respect, let alone mutual aid that to me are foundational and intersectional principles for participating in omni's project.
I think, if we're serious about our values, we should not let such bullying be an accepted and routine practice in omni and there needs to be at a minimum, real dialogue and real accountability. It's proven difficult to do that when omninoms are told by almaz stuff like "you're a waste of my time" (paraphrasing) as her means to resolve others' concerns. etc. From what I have seen, their past track record includes a trail of abusive behavior and a steadfast refusal to engage in any kind of resolution or dialogue. The more recent developments of literally locking off space in omni (that seems rarely used by them), not depositing funds from events etc, seems in line with prior actions. Above all for me though its almaz's treatment of other people in our communities that concern me the most, especially with regards events, because this has alienated communities both outside of and inside omni.
My 2c -
David