Forum

I was going to threaten to leave over thier behaviour online as well...and also over my disgust at OB's inability to hold folks accountable or even to put in play a simple de-esculation plan...but I'm not important enough for that to matter....so why bother giving them the satisfaction? They behaved like angels at GA, at least until I left.

Folks shouldn't be fooled...the moment they decide they don't like you or something you say you'll get yours from them too....and I think thier point is to make you leave.

The behavior on the forum should also constitute grounds for sanction...it's part of the outreach...and right now they are effectivly vandalizing the forum and slandering people with no regard to how it looks to the public.

During the relatively peacful period at gas following the walkout they created false profiles to troll individuals and OB...when called out they came as themselves to start more trouble useing the attempts of folks to set up some...or any mechinism so that the disruptions and destructive behavior would stop, as an excuse to start provoking people...sending in family members as well to post and attack.

This is unacceptable.

It has been emotionally draining for me as well....I came here to help and have faced relentless assault from them...simply for holding a different opinion. I will however not leave...I'm a stubborn SOB.

Erin's point is very well taken.

It is #OB's decision to attempt to delegate the unpleasant task of coping with disruption to... well, me... that strikes me as the most troubling aspect of all of this.

The 1% (particularly corporations) delegate unpleasant tasks like how to deal with internal disruption like this to so-called "hatchet men". #OB has never looked or acted more like the 1% than in its attempt to delegate such unpleasant responsibility to an individual (ANY individual).

I believe that Erin is taking those steps necessary to protect herself, and her well-being, in light of the unwillingness of #OB to protect her as an individual, or itself as a group, from whatever the hell this mess actually is.

I believe that #OB owes a duty of care to its membership (as individuals and as a group) to create an environment where the group is able to affect the change it seeks to make. I don't believe that #OB is fulfilling that duty of care and it is paying the price for its inaction.

I also beleive that Erin's decision notwithstanding, #OB has not severed its ties with her, and I hope that #OB can find a way to make itself a welcome place for Erin to return in the near future.

We can't sit back and do nothing in the event that conflict within the membership of #OB devolves into something as ugly and as irreconcilable as what has happened between David and Erin.

I remind all who read this that it is due to Erin's initiative and skill that we were able to have a functional website up within 24 hours of our original website being radically modified in early February.

I could list the other accomplishments that Erin has achieved on behalf of #OB, and the list would be a long and impressive one. However, the point I want to make is that even if Erin hadn't been such an undeniably key and active participant in what has gone right in #OB, she still would deserve not to be subject to the things I have seen.

There is no excuse, no rationale, no argument, no context that can place this conflict into a light that renders it acceptable. David has given himself permission to treat Erin in a dreadful manner. Erin has done nothing to deserve it. In a world that is a spectrum of greys, this is about as close to black and white as it gets. If there is room for reasonable people to disagree on whether or not David's actions towards Erin are unacceptable, I can't see it.

Where there is room for reasonable people to disagree, is in what the response of #OB could be and should be.

If we were a traditional business, David's conduct could constitute creating a hostile work environment. And if a business knew about it, and did nothing, that business would be vulnerable to a lawsuit.

If we didn't have such a target rich environment of external threats, this would still be unacceptable. But the fact is, we have government at every level (including Homeland Security), a phalanx of well coined corporations and its vassals in the mainstream media as enemies.

Our common foes are all around us. They are better funded and better organized, and they have control over our government. And they want to destroy us. Completely.

In this light, this bullshit goes beyond unacceptable to outright self destructive.

It was pointed out to me, by a dear friend who watches #OB from the outside, that we spend about 80% of our time on so-called "internal matters". I was about to agree with my friend until I realized that we actually spend 80% of our time NOT dealing with internal matters.

We actually spend 80% of our time kicking the internal matters can down the road.

#OB seems to believe if we ignore these problems and just focus on the viscerally satisfying business of world change that everything will get better.

Well, to paraphrase Doctor Phil... "how's THAT workin' for ya?"

We have held process holidays, we tried non-voting GAs, we've tried First Nation inspired Council circles, and we have yet to get to that magic reboot event that will get us back to the halcyon time when we could focus on world change rather than finance work group issues and internal strife resolution.

Erin is now added to a list of people that include Erik Goheen, Jon Robataille, and Nancy Metcalf and many many others who are no longer currently active in #OB.

How many more people are you folks willing to lose?

Well here I am - so behind I can hardly believe it. I, too am a Stubborn person and wil not leave #OB yet. But, honestly, I may. If I can retain some of the friendships I've made.

In case any of you are surprised at our (#OB) response to these conflicts as a people in the USA our best defenses are denial and avoidance. It is no surprise we can't get around this accountabilty thing.

We need to get a strong accountabilty proposal accepted. This is a priority. Not that we will have any enforcement power. So we will find a way to build into the proposal a way to give the GA the power to enforce. IF you haven't read the drumming issue before the OWS please do. IT's in several email strings so find it. Drumming circle may defeat the OWS.

Also the "Tyranny of Structurelessness" is a good read. It's an old article but still very relevant to our issues.

PEACE

I no longer believe we should hold folks accountable for past actions...there is no doubt that David and Avery were wrong to do what they did, and much of thier anger was misdirected...both Erin and I took a lot of it online ....Erin more than me...and it was uncalled for... so I sympathise with Erin for sure. But we can and should forgive or at least let it go...and save an accountability process for future problems...or as Erin pointed out, no process is really needed if we all just say "enough"....but here's the problem....I call Bravo Sierra on Marcia...can I now start her down the process of accountability? Of course not, because all the process proposals only address a certain kind of uncivil behaviour...not the underhanded manipulative divisive and anti-occupy behaviour that is rampant in OB. Ronna...when I pointed everyone to that article, it was to point out that Avery and David, et al not only represented a problem, but were pointing out one...the conflict was inevitable...and these accountability proposals are only addressing a symptom....it is by design punishing one side of the room because they were the first to lose their cool and go off the deep end....I'M ABOUT TO GO OFF THE DEEP END...and I will likewise be wrong should I...but what's the real problem??? we can't address the real problem so long as we are focused on accountability.

...if we do decide to hold people accountable in the future it must go hand in hand with ga reform as there is clearly a problem that those outbursts were trying to address...they were just directed at the wrong people and in fact exemplify the problems they were trying to address...yes hypocritical to say the least...and it was because I pointed that out and that I hold a different perspective...a different ideology...than Avery that I became a target...that too was the hypocracy...but...

By setting up an accountability process...that is kicking them out based on the outbursts and web attacks...means we are saying that only THAT kind of disruption and divisive behaviour is subject to group reprisal....what about the other side of them room? The ones that interupt, attempt to control the movement through process or backroom deals to do "something about them"..."them" now includes ReOccupy Whatcom......what about all the rest of the disrespect?...Erin...I do not believe it was you, you became a target in the same way I did, for holding a different perspective on the problems that didn't fit with thier narrative/ideology...but what I am suggesting is that we approach this by looking for recompence instead of reprisal...and I believe David wants the same...that is, let's make this right for everyone....Avery has stepped away...so that is solved.

Erin, I had coffee with David the other day...we did discuss the issue between you two a bit...not much...but I can say he doesn't want to see you leave OB, and I am sure that he will do what he can to make things right...but you have be willing to hear his apology in person....or just let it go.... would a combination of some sort of future accountability process and a real apology work for you? How about a promise not to ever make personal attacks on you ever again and that if he does he will walk away? how about you two agree not to moderate each other's comments on the forums...let someone else do it?

Yes, GA and the forums should be a safe spaces...but safe for all...and we are only focusing on one behaviour that causes unsafe spaces...not the other and more common behaviours that are excused, almost encouraged....

all you need do is see what Marcia is doing...it is no different in effect than the outbursts...no less disrespectful...no less divisive, ...and now calling on doing something about Ten...it's a witch hunt now...will this accountability process be used agianst me next?....without ga reform an accountability process can and will be used agianst us all based on ideological differences...just keep goading folks you disagree with until they leave or snap (then kick them out useing the process)...sorry to seem to be doing a 180 on this, I am not excuseing their behaviour...it was wrong...but they are human too. I was trying to get them to understand WHY this happens so they would stop with the attacks...but I was also trying to get the other side of the room to understand as well...now that they have stepped back...and they have...I see no reason to to exact vengence...i supported the accountability only because they refused to stop attacking...now this thing has become the problem.

if Ten or I can somehow broker a compromise...set up a safe place for us all to talk...I am sure we will find that this can be resolved and that we are more likely than not all in agreement about the dysfunction...despite the apparent hypocracy...but that is to be human. Can we let cooler heads prevail? Because at this point, kicking them out solves nothing...we can as a group find a way to hold folks accountable in the future...but it must apply to ALL the behaviours, not just to those that made the mistake of being the first to snap.

"The point here is that we are all very different and probably came into the movement to achieve different ends."
Absolutly....

"I'm still on the theory that being organized will help us achieve our goals. As a communiity we are organized - we can't be otherwise in a community. But we may not be organized in a way that can achieve our ends or even agree on our means to the end. There is despair, apathy, anxiety, anger, and a host of other internal personal issues impedign the work here. We could try to get a hold of these issues in ourselves and BE PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE."

Yes...and there is a kind of alternative structure/organization that is being built by those frustrated with the ga as we speak...more on that later...but no to the:

"We could try to get a hold of these issues in ourselves and BE PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE."

That is actually the WRONG approach...in the end you can't fix human, you have to work around human...though it is theoritically possible to do this, and we should all try, the reality is that is a personal thing, unless we made it a focus of the group...then we are just self improvement organization...and no one I know thinks that is why they come to GA...and of course most don't think they need to change ...so many problems with this approach...folks can't even reconize when they are being disrespectful...how long do we work on them?

Leadership is (we are all leaders right?) is one part behaviour and one part process. Our process must be changed because we can't change everyone's behaviour....that's why I talk about GA reform....and it's simplier than you might think.

"Zeke, I would like to challenge you to try to describe behaviors that are disruptive to this community not just accuse certain people of trying to control things because of their "privelege". IS SHE REALLY GETTING SLAMMED BECAUSE SHE USED THE "WRAP IT UP" HAND SIGNAL INNAPROPRIATELY AND INSULTED SOMEONE BY IT? "

I do have a bit of bite in my rhetoric don't I?...I will post an apology for being too sharp...it is just the way I am...I have been meaning to add more emoticons :-)...but in this instance, she crossed a line with that email.

Let me start by saying it is all in that article I constanly point to...do you not think that M. belongs to an elite group? I belong to one, Avery and David do, in fact almost all of us do. Now let's match that up to behaviors: she did more than just roll her hands...she also interrupted him verbally...and then she did the same to David...and it was not only tolerated by the facilitator, it was validated. Then she called Jewells and sent out that email. If you read her posts or listen to what she said when she interupted there was an agenda behind her actions...she said she didn't feel that what Ten has been contributing had anything to do with occupy and didn't like the direction...this is clearly controlling behaviour. now ask yourself, how is it she felt empowered to do these things? It is because of the realitive structureless of our process and because of her association with others that form an elite group....and because we tolerate disrespectful behaviour. when I say "check your privilege" that is exactly what I mean. The various elite groups one belongs to...not just in occupy...is what gives one a sense of empowerment to act with authority on something....you must check you privilege....it is not a mean statement...priviledge here is a state of mind, it is what gives you the right to be disrespectful to others without even realizing it. And in this case...and I know there are many, many others, these behaviours and processes are directly matched up to an agenda of controlling the movement, but is it a malicious? No...at least not likely...and I also believe that what David and Avery did was not malicious....but it is all infuriating.

The bad behavior can be traced to the process itself when applied to real humans....and yes, there are simple solutions.

But you ask about more than Marcia and Ten's spat...but you'll have to forgive me, I did not take notes on the other incidences I have witnessed...but here are a couple I can recall well enough:

C.L. was rudely interupted recently, by the "other side of the room" and it was all but tolerated...he said he's out....as I said "...just keep goading folks you disagree with until they leave or snap (then kick them out using the process)."...that too is a form of control...by causeing self-exclusion, dissent is silenced.

Same GA after the discussion on solidarity with the Lummi was discused and voted on, after Ten left the room for a cigarette L. got on stack and questioned Ten heritage calling him white and cautioning the room behind his back to be careful trusting him.
That's controlling...that's not checking your priviledge.

Ian, McKenna, James, David, Avery, Charles, Walter, Christina, Summer, Dean, (off the top of my head) have expressed the same concerns...I know there are at least a dozen others I have heard about....wow...that's almost a GA in itself...think about that.

they are also concerned with a related issue, that is the inability of OBGA to take desissive actions, or more commonly the complaint is that ideas of direct actions are shot down...this is a symptom of this dynamic....and I could add more names to this list.

So yeah, I don't want it to be personal, but what was done and said was clear enough...and the culture of not saying anything about it in OB is what is killing us...our refusal to deal with it...NOT JUST AVERY AND DAVID, BUT EVERYONE....so GA reform, not behaviour adjustments...that hippy stuff isn't going to work...great as an individual, but I'm not going to bet the movement on it.

If you want some basic organizational/process solutions...and how we get there from here you have to recognize the problem, because the problem will keep you from implimenting the solutions....this is the catch 22 we are in....many are slowly doing it themselves....there was a huge mistake the way GA was designed and in what folks thought GA was...but that is another complex story...but the solution is painfully simple....the biggest obstical is going to be those personalities and ideologies that need/want a structure that can be controlled....they will be a tough sell....and what M. did puts her in that category I would think...in fact, that may the defining characteristic of a particular group in OB....but sure, conjecture...it is tough talking about these things without putting names to the folks because you are reading into thier behaviour....but I am trying hard not to say that such and such is a bad person...just that they are a person and they need to check thier priviledge 🙂

so much more to this...ideologies, the diverse reasons we occupy competeing for attention, the concept of GA validation and authority, money, the self selective nature of GA, the natural exclusivness of face-to0face wg meetings.....but I believe it all can be solved.

EDIT: tired...i think i rambled...sorry.