- Ego Driven conversation:
Where I will agree with you is that the meetings are long, and the same people are contributing, and I think this has to do with format, and so I don't go to the meetings. I suggest you don't go if you don't like it either, and I propose that we offline as much as possible, have votes, and reduce the time of meetings to 45 minutes or 1/2 hour, and stop with the introductions et all.
That being said, accusing the process of being "EGO driven" is more of an aesthetic to which you ascribe to your world(and possibly others), but not me. I think it's how some people just work things out, and they are trying hard to make SUDO a better place. If we really want to discuss things, let's organize our thoughts on paper, and actually contribute, yay or nay, before meeting on Wednesdays so that we can just take a vote and keep the meetings under 45 minutes.
- Bureaucracy and Police:
In my opinion, the notion of just letting things happen "naturally," isn't a valid argument, and I think that's what you are saying. Going back to the aesthetics of things, natural to me means that smart people come together to form our own way of doing things, usually involving intellectual process, and usually that involves some sort of documentation. That culture is fine with me. Solving the problems in the moment on a whim seems very unfair, and I don't want to be part of a drum circle when a problem happens(sorry for that joke)...Just not my thing. Having someone work through this process with us, seems like a good idea, You obviously have the right to comment on this and actively seek an alternative, but I don't think the alternative should be to reduce overhead for no reason. Although, I would love to reduce overhead altogether.
Overall, I don't disagree with a lot of what you say about making the meetings better for everyone. But, I think it's not very logical to assume that bureaucracy is bad, and that we are trying to police things. I don't even go to meetings normally(because they are 3 freaking hours), and I don't think this process is how you describe from what I have read and overheard, and from the meetings I have attended.
I know you're frustrated, but I think we can improve these things, and discuss them in a different way that saves people time and makes the process have more intellectual vigor.
-Rusty
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Eddan
<eddan@clear.net> wrote:
Patrick -
I share your frustration, even as I end up taking part in what is frustrating about it. It is unfortunate the manner in which these discussions have evolved, but I think it is also worth considering why these sadly uninviting conversations keep coming up so that we can try to fix it rather than ignore what it might signify when articulated in a more friendly spirit.
It is my impression that underlying all the technicalities is a sense that we're broaching the point where making decisions on behalf of the whole feels more important. You could say we are graduating into the next phase of the spiritual constitution of this unlikely community. It stirs emotion because we share the dissatisfaction of the existing models of how this is done regularly and want passionately for this to be different than that.
I know that you're right that the rules-based version of this feeling is likely not the best way to go. But we still have to figure out how to make decisions together, even if it is the choreography of a puppet-show folk-dance.
-Eddan
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
--
Cheers,