[sudo-discuss] Agenda Item for next week's meeting: ONL is not a member collective.

Mon Sep 8 15:12:34 PDT 2014

Also to clarify, I'm not a delegate any more, so I speak only as a
supporter of ONL as a show and the work they do to keep it running. I think
the Omni collective should continue to support ONL, but I have no intention
or really ability to block any decision to remove their membership status.

Thanks,
Andrew

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Lowe <andrew at lostways.com> wrote:

> Non participation is a serious issue. I was mostly providing counter
> points to the other issues that were being brought up.
>
> I think it would be fair to ask for ONL to change its status due to the
> nature of the project (a once a month event) and the lack of participation.
>
> I just think the other points are invalid and wanted to gives my
> perspective on those. As far a rent is concerned I was not using
> Backspace's decision to finalize their contribution as less that than
> initial estimates before the sublease option was signed as a justification.
> I was only pointing out the fact that there is no bi-law or anything in our
> governance that I know of that would require them to reapply as the
> proposal states they must.
>  On Sep 8, 2014 1:26 PM, "David Keenan" <dkeenan44 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrew and Batkid, the core issue is not the content of their show,
>> although it was distressing enough I felt the need to tack it on there.
>>
>> The core issue is that they slashed their rent, do not participate at all
>> in delegate meetings, dont pay their bills, dont really help out even with
>> setting up their own shows. Its profoundly unfair, offloads work and
>> financial responsibility onto others, and if every collective did that
>> there would be no omni. I am saying that they are not member collective of
>> the omni.
>>
>> Batkid and Andrew, given this, do you think they deserve to be full
>> voting delegates with as much voting power as Sudo Room or BAPS?
>>
>> Re: Backspace, I would rather not bridge this conversation into other
>> examples, but yes, Backspace reduced its rent by 50% and this was also
>> extremely probelmatic and came very close to stopping us from moving into
>> the Omni...If you recall Andrew, at the time, the precident of ONL first
>> unilaterally slashing its rent was actually cited by Backspace at the time
>> as a justifying precedent and rationale for Backspace cutting back its
>> contribution, too. Now though, you're saying that Backspace cutting back
>> its contrib justifies ONL doing it beforehand which doesn't really make
>> sense. Neither decision, by Backspace or ONL, was actually officially
>> consensed on by the group, you know?
>>
>> Unlike with ONL, the Backspace issue *was* discussed (although *not*
>> consensed nor brought to the point of decision) at a meeting, and more
>> germanely Backspace *did* continue to work with OOC to figure something
>> out, and, you will note, that now, Backspace is also *not* in its space,
>> and has to its credit figured out a plan at least to work more flexibly
>> within the rest of the building. And the OOC *is* able to rent at least
>> some of the space Backspace was going to be in and thereby make up the
>> $1000 of lost rent, ie via Rise Above, etc.
>>
>> When Backspace slashed the amount of their rent literally as I was
>> walking into a financial presentation for John it made my job extremely
>> difficult and almost sank the project, so I don't know that this is the
>> best example!
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:26 AM, The Batkid <batkid at gmx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I wouldn't kick ONL out on the street just yet.
>>>
>>> ONL is a variety show, they do all kinds of things.  At the old space,
>>> they had Susie Cagle on to talk about her work interviewing
>>> the families of Oakland gunshot victims and restorative justice.
>>>
>>> Then everyone wore silly hats in a photobooth.
>>>
>>> I'm excited about Jean Quan appearing on ONL next month.
>>>
>>> *Sent:* Monday, September 08, 2014 at 9:19 AM
>>> *From:* niki <niki.shelley at gmail.com>
>>> *To:* "Andrew Lowe" <andrew at lostways.com>
>>> *Cc:* yar <yardenack at gmail.com>, "sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org" <
>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>, "omnilogistics at lists.riseup.net" <
>>> omnilogistics at lists.riseup.net>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [sudo-discuss] Agenda Item for next week's meeting: ONL
>>> is not a member collective.
>>>  The argument is not that ONL is not radical enough, it's that the show
>>> was basically a free commercial for the mayoral candidates. Free, meaning,
>>> subsidized by the Omni and when I say the Omni I mean the groups that are
>>> currently contributing to making the Omni function.
>>>
>>> Creating a civic space for the community means engaging the community,
>>> not having politicians sit there and spout meaningless rhetoric at the
>>> community for two hours.
>>>
>>> If ONL wants to just be nothing more than an entertaining talk show, why
>>> have mayoral candidates on as guests?
>>>
>>> N
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Andrew Lowe <andrew at lostways.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   I did not attend this event, but I have attended ONL events before.
>>>> ONL is a talk show, I'm not sure why not being political enough makes them
>>>> "offensive". I mean I will let them speak for them selves, but they are an
>>>> entertainment show, why would you expect a "debate" at a talk show?
>>>>
>>>> Also while it is true that ONL reduced their rent before singing the
>>>> sublease option, there still has been no official policy that says that
>>>> that action (which Backspace took as well, at the time) requires a
>>>> re-application.
>>>>
>>>> It would be great if ONL paid more, but keep in mind that we haven't
>>>> come up with a price for nightly rentals in the ballroom, when we do I
>>>> think it would be fair to evaluate ONL's contribution based on that.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, just standing up for this show even if it isn't really my cup
>>>> of tea all the time, I think what ONL has been able to do with it is pretty
>>>> amazing, and to force them out because their show isn't radical enough in
>>>> the ways you want it to be would be a shame.
>>>>
>>>> --Andrew
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:33 AM, yar <yardenack at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> http://wiki.omni-oakland.org/w/ONL
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 9:24 PM, Charley Sheets <rcsheets at acm.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > It seems like section 7 could use some additional detail. I for one
>>>>> > don't know what "Saturday's 9/6 ONL event" was, or why it would be
>>>>> > offensive.
>>>>>
>>>>> They had 3 mayoral candidates in the room (parker, tuman, siegel), but
>>>>> chose to interview one candidate at a time. Each candidate got an
>>>>> uninterrupted stump speech, pandering questions from the hosts, then 2
>>>>> ad-hoc audience questions, and that was it. One even screened a
>>>>> commercial.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was disappointed and insulted because I'd heard it was going to be a
>>>>> "debate." Maybe it got distorted in the rumor-mill. But either way,
>>>>> this candidate-showcasing style of engagement is something people have
>>>>> fought against for ages. It's passive, undemocratic, and pointless. If
>>>>> we're going to engage with electoral politics we should know this
>>>>> history. Here's the League of Women Voters explaining why they stopped
>>>>> hosting presidential "debates" in 1988:
>>>>> http://www.lwv.org/press-releases/league-refuses-help-perpetrate-fraud
>>>>>
>>>>> Some more history:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_debates#Debate_sponsorship
>>>>>
>>>>> I think at minimum, a debate needs to:
>>>>>
>>>>> * force candidates to interact with each other
>>>>> * invite all candidates at the same time
>>>>> * prioritize audience participation and engagement
>>>>>
>>>>> We missed an opportunity - we had them on our turf and did nothing new
>>>>> with them - but it's not too late. On October 11 they're hosting 3
>>>>> more (schaaf, kaplan, quan). Maybe ONL will be open to input on how
>>>>> they conduct next month's event! Any Sudoers who want to ask tough
>>>>> questions on the record of present and future mayors on our turf,
>>>>> now's your chance to get involved. :)
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>>> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>> ---------
>>>> Andrew Lowe
>>>> http://www.lostways.com
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>>> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>>
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing
>>> list sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>>> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>

-- 
---------
Andrew Lowe
http://www.lostways.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20140908/0325df03/attachment.html>