[Vanhackspace] Last Night's Meeting

[shane]

Joe et al,

Thanks for opening up the discussion on this Joe, I feel that it's  
important that we engage with these issues and I'm not averse to  
conflict and in fact I think it's quite a healthy dynamic (in  
moderation) and I recognize that we are all coming to VHS from  
different vectors with different backgrounds and interests.. I believe  
our diversity is our strength and respect that my opinions may not  
necessarily be reflected by others in the group, but there's only one  
way to find out and that's to be expressive and have a mature  
discussion about where our interests align and where they do not.

Since last night was our first 'real' meeting, at least in the sense  
that we actually got into some of the sticky details of organizing a  
collective amongst a group where there is a minimal amount of  
knowledge of one another's personalities and preferences - never mind  
our individual politics and desires for the group and space.

Bruce Tuckman suggests that group forming follows a general pattern  
with distinct, necessary and inevitable phases.. in our case it seems  
that we are following the pattern of group "Forming - Storming ->  
Norming -> Performing.." [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forming-storming-norming-performing 
  ]

In our case we've embodied the first two stages quite well and in my  
opinion we seem to be on track to moving beyond this and into  
norming.. that said you've raised some important issues and we will be  
better served by engaging with them rather than sweeping them under  
the carpet.. and therefore my gratitude for  opening up the space.. i  
hope we can have a mature discussion about it and build trust and  
understanding of one another as a result.

On 3-Sep-08, at 8:37 AM, Joe Bowser wrote:

> Last night's meeting was probably the worst meeting that I've ever  
> been to.

Ok. I'm sure it's likely that some of us have never been to such a  
meeting and on the other hand been to some that have experienced much  
worse, but that's beside the point, clearly there are some important  
things we can learn from it so that our meeting are more effective and  
better reflect our principles and those of the space as we move forward.

> I failed in facilitating it, and it just turned into yelling, and ad- 
> hominim attacks against me and other people in the group.

I agree, more facilitation of the discussion would have been a good  
thing.. it's not an easy task and especially when there are passionate  
debates over ideals and ethics that we all seem to take rather  
seriously and for good reason IMO.

I think that self facilitation is a critical skill and it'll help us  
avoid bogging down our meetings with too much process.. that said the  
only way we can have better facilitation in general is for us all to  
skill up.. so that we can all share in the responsibility.

i'm not sure what exactly you are referring to regarding ad-hominim  
attacks against you and others? Can you clarify here? It's clearly a  
problem and not one that I noted.

> It's clear that our meetings aren't working, and I don't feel that  
> we made any clear consensus decisions at the last meeting beyond the  
> basic principles, which we promptly took a giant shit on.

I disagree. I think our meetings are working, at least to the degree  
that I'd expect a group of hackers who are simultaneously getting to  
know one another while defining the direction and principles of the  
group.

Have we had much of discussion about concensus? I don't remember it..  
there was reference to voting at the meeting with regard to projects  
and such - maybe this is worth flagging for more discussion. It seemed  
to me that we were rolling with something akin to "We reject: kings,  
presidents and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and running  
code" [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_D._Clark ]

With regard to not adhering to our principles it's important that we  
call one another on each other's shit.. It can be done in a  
constructive or destructive manner.. I hope that we can do it in a  
constructive was and learn from it as result.

I, and others called you out on your sexist remark regarding the  
reporter. It was done with interest of holding one another to account  
and was done in a friendly and constructive manner. We hadn't actually  
dealt with it and had any procedures or norms for doing so.. so i  
suggested you could bring us all a beer for the following meeting  
(more on that below) - it wasn't done to pile on and attack you but  
instead to create a deterrent in order that we as a group take the  
commitment to holding an anti-sexist and therfore inclusive space.  
Currently our gender balance is reflective of the tech sector in  
general and I'd hope that we could do much better than that in both  
the short and long term.. IMO the patriarchal norms and passive sexism  
that is pervasive in our society and more importantly in male dominant  
space is a big part of the root problem. I intend to do my best to  
create a much different space and reality at Emma's Hackery.

That said, my arbitrary penalty was just that. I realize that it can  
be seen as a coercive means and if you or others have issue with that  
- well let's get into it and find something that's acceptable for  
everyone.. it seemed to me that no one considered it to be out of order.

> If meetings continue to be like this, I think that I'm going to have  
> to back out, since I have better things to do with my time than  
> fight over things over and over again.

We are in process here, Tuckman suggests that the storming element is  
not only critical but that it's inevitable.. the key to moving out of  
it is holding a mature disposition and creating a healthy space and  
process for us to deal with it so we can move on to norming and  
performing.

There are two Zapatista sayings that may be helpful with regard to  
where we are at and where we'd like to go.. they are “We walk slowly  
because we are going very far” and “Walking, we ask questions.” [ http://lanic.utexas.edu/project/Zapatistas/chapter07.html 
  ]

> I honestly don't think I'm able to continue working on the VHS  
> project if we have another meeting where it just amounts to yelling  
> and intimidation by a few members who feel that they are more  
> anarchist than thou.

Fair enough, we all have the liberty and agency to both associate and  
dis-associate from the group as we see fit.. that said I have issue  
with your cryptic comment.. in fact I think your comment here may be  
the first and only ad-hominem attack I've heard thus far.

None of what I heard last night was ego or posturing by anyone  
expressing that they were more anarchist or l33t or otherwise. I heard  
a number of people expressing opinions that were important to them  
personally and more importantly people were generally listening to one  
another and respecting one another's opinions.

Clearly Dallas and I were coming from different perspectives and there  
were many other shades in between.. we listened to one another - we  
hashed it out - we found "rough concensus and running code" for the  
future.. it's not set in stone.. it's something we will reflect on and  
modify as we see fit..

Dallas and I spoke after the meeting and we both expressed respect for  
one another's opinions, ideals and such.. we are listening to one  
another - building trust and respect, continue to ask questions and  
learning as we go. I desire nothing more or less.

If you're still reading - well thanks for listening :) It's been a  
while since I've written at such length.. and something I'd never care  
to do without the face to face aspect of our group.. I believe - big  
time - in meeting face to face to have the type of discussions that we  
had last night. I don't believe we would have ever been as  
constructive over email as we managed to be face to face last night..  
for that my respect and thanks to everyone for sticking it out and  
sharing openly.

Regarding beer and yelling. I suspect that one enables and encourages  
the other. I have a simple process suggestion for Tuesday night  
meetings.. move last nights first agenda (drink beer) item to the end  
of the meeting. This will not only help dis-able alcohol fueled  
yelling and such but also motivate us to get through our meeting as  
quickly as we can so we get onto the important stuff - show and tell,  
drinking beer and generally getting our hack on..

Much respect,
Shane