Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [smygo] Critique Of Occupy General Strike Meeting

Expand Messages
  • Chuck Munson
    What you describe is a particular group of people who aren t running a meeting effectively and a few individuals who are insensitive to that group s process.
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 8, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      What you describe is a particular group of people who aren't running a
      meeting effectively and a few individuals who are insensitive to that
      group's process.

      Your complaints are not a criticism of consensus.

      An effective group using consensus would never let a meeting go beyond 3
      hours. The facilitators should have explained that outstanding issues would
      have to be tabled to the next meeting. There is rarely an issue so dire
      that it should be allowed to extend a meeting for too long. Normally, the
      important issues are addressed first in a meeting.

      People also need to be sensitive about what's going around them and not
      drag out a meeting with their issues when everybody wants to go home.

      Chuck


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Gary
      Nice theory Chuck, but I have never seen a general meeting last much less than 3 hours, especially when you have lots of first timers and people from
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 9, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Nice theory Chuck, but I have never seen a general meeting last much less than 3 hours, especially when you have lots of first timers and people from organizations that don't use consensus as part of their process. We are moving into new territory and I think consensus is starting to cause problems of process.

        --- In smygo@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Munson <chuck0munson@...> wrote:
        >
        > What you describe is a particular group of people who aren't running a
        > meeting effectively and a few individuals who are insensitive to that
        > group's process.
        >
        > Your complaints are not a criticism of consensus.
        >
        > An effective group using consensus would never let a meeting go beyond 3
        > hours. The facilitators should have explained that outstanding issues would
        > have to be tabled to the next meeting. There is rarely an issue so dire
        > that it should be allowed to extend a meeting for too long. Normally, the
        > important issues are addressed first in a meeting.
        >
        > People also need to be sensitive about what's going around them and not
        > drag out a meeting with their issues when everybody wants to go home.
        >
        > Chuck
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.