[sudo-discuss] new proposal - need input

[David Keenan]

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

On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 1:22 PM Jake <jake at spaz.org> wrote:

> I agree Robb.
>
> Yar, i think you're being unreasonable in your blanket defense of Almaz
> and your
> requests are heard and considered, but don't change what i feel is obvious.
>
> Almaz has been working in bad faith with Omni, taking advantage of our
> trust,
> finances, leniency, and sensitivity to being called Racist.
>
> I think they should be excised from power for their BLATANT attempt at
> stealing
> money from the commons through outright fraud, and that their personal
> attacks
> and divisive tactics be condemned and kept out of omni meetings.
>
> i don't know why you're so blind to Almaz' ill will and cynical behavior
> but i
> beg you to think about it more and get some neutral advice.
>
> -jake
>
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, robb wrote:
>
> > unfortunately, Yar, i feel you're undermining those values & being
> > manipulated
> > i look forward to not feeling that way & am willing to work towards that
> > goal
> > <3
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 12:13 PM Yardena Cohen <yardenack at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 12:02 PM Jenny Ryan <tunabananas at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> I for one will simply stop "shuffling paperwork" then
> >>> thanks for dismissing everything i've experienced.
> >>
> >> I don't mean to dismiss your experience and I'm sorry it's come off
> >> that way. I appreciate all the paperwork you've done and I recognize
> >> that is valuable labor. I just believe personally that the primary
> >> purpose of that labor is to enable our communities to exist at sudo &
> >> omni and support the work everybody is doing. People come first. I
> >> understand you've had conflicts with Almaz, but I hope you'll
> >> understand where I'm coming from.
> >>
> >> Sudoroom's values from back in the day:
> >>
> >> * Value open, public discourses over closed, proprietary processes.
> >> * Value access and transparency over exclusivity.
> >> * Value solving real problems over hypotheticals, while respecting
> >> visions of the future.
> >> * Value community and collaboration over isolation and competition.
> >> * Value human judgment over automation and efficiency.
> >> * Value do-ocracy over bureaucracy.
> >> * Value safe space over ideology.
> >>
> >> https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Articles_of_Association#Values
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20190211/740b40a3/attachment.html>