[statecom] [adcom] Fwd: decisions reached at the 6-29-08 in-person StateCom meeting

[Yarden]

Dan,
As you were leaving, having hurriedly collected some things that you  
brought with you, I came up to you to find out why you were leaving so  
precipitously, and to tell you that you were needed.  You answered  
that you were not walking out -- that you needed your ride.

As facilitator, I knew that you were needed for what now appears to me  
as hindsight.  And also, please observe that my attitudes toward rules  
cannot be those of a parliamentarian.  And it also reminded me of the  
dynamics of the single meeting of the AdCom which, at the insistence  
of Jamie McLaughlin (the only other delegate to the NC), I attended.   
Matters proceeded more or less smoothly despite the non-appearance of  
any co-chair.  Grace Ross arrived after about an hour, demanded that  
people go back over things that she had missed,  I remember  turning  
to you -- as parliamentarian -- to answer some question.  That did  
it.  Grace treated it as a sexist snub, and for the remainder of my  
stay, made be wait, and interfered with the purpose for which I had  
been asked to come.  I appreciated that in her eyes -- if in hers  
alone made no difference -- I was completely unwelcome, that his was  
enough to prevent the actions needed from being heard.  However wrong,  
this required repair.  It was my error that allowed her to behave  
toward me on categorical assumptions, and I decided that we needed to  
talk and we have ever since.

Life is not easy for a new kid on the block.  Even after more than  
three years.  Grace even complimented me recently, when referring to  
the good times after the merger when she and Gary ran things, by  
remembering that I was not around then. I was, but it was not until  
after the 2004 convention -- having worked in the party for almost  
five years that I even considered that I might have something to offer  
the State Committee.  An understanding of the 10KV in the the light of  
ecological thinking, as well as an appreciation of the role of history  
and culture in human affairs.

So with interest I read your authoritative conclusions -- about what  
occurred in your absence or might not have occurred had you been  
present.  This is important to me as ecologist -- concerned with the  
realities of social interactions -- and not only with rule permitted  
ones that form but one aspect of the whole picture.  Sometimes it  
might be called; looking to seeing how the rules work.
And knowing that they frequently work badly, I also know the standard  
gaming response of --- well then let's change the rules. It might be  
better to consider the role of rationality, social power, and other  
matters, if we are to become what we claim.


On Jun 30, 2008, at 9:33 PM, Daniel Melnechuk wrote:

First:

> Thank you for getting some early results back. Full text of the
> passed proposals to statecom list by the sponsors are desired as soon
> as possible.
>
> Here are my opinions as procedurally on a few of these items:
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>>
>> 4. ad com proposals and actions
>>
>>
>>
>> Jill Stein was elected as a diversity representative to Ad-Com by a
>> vote
>> of 11 – 0 – 3.
>>
>>
>>
>> Proposal "L" on ad-com size change proposed by Merelice and Nat was
>> adopted by consensus as originally written. Implementation of this
>> proposal requires adoption of new bylaws at the State Convention; the
>> change in ad-com size will not take place till then.
>
> Saying that this proposal requires adoption of new bylaws at the
> state convention is incorrect. Our bylaws allow changing the bylaws
> by statecom. But it requires consensus or a 3/4 vote to adopt. If so
> adopted then they are put up for review at the state convention.
>
> So all this proposal in effect is a recommendation that the state
> convention is to look at possibly adopting bylaw changes to change
> adcom, or not. There has not been any effective change in the size of
> adcom.
All well and good,  I can understand what you say.
I observe that, according to Luc, who was present, the concern about  
the poor functioning of the Ad-Com was a very real one, and that  
instead of operating in an administrative role, it was hampered by  
both size, and endless controversy that prevented it from doing that  
for which it was intended.  Is this true?


Secondly;
>>
>>
>>
>> 5. virtual state com meeting
>>
>>
>>
>> State Com appointed new co-facilitators to the June 14th online
>> virtual
>> state com meeting currently taking place: Wanda Boeke and Eli
>> Beckerman to
>> relieve Jamie O'Keefe, who becomes the former facilitator of that
>> meeting.
>
> There was no proposal put forth two weeks in advance of this statecom
> meeting, nor was this action brought up as an urgent matter that the
> statecom meeting decided at the beginning of the meeting to take up.
> So this attempt by unseat the facilitator and to change the virtual
> meeting taking place is not valid.
>
> On top of that, the virtual meeting is it's own meeting with
> participants who decided to do what it is doing. If people want to
> change facilitators at the virtual meeting then someone needs to
> bring up a proposal in that meeting to change the facilitators.
> Attempting to reach into one meeting from another has no basis in
> procedure or bylaws.
This sounds very much like a 'takeover' in an adversarial situation.   
And I am sure that, had you been present, not only would you have  
explained matters carefully and thoughtfully -- I certainly would  
have, as facilitator turned to you for your opinion -- but that some  
other way might have been considered in dealing with the problem of  
continued partisan delay of in addressing the purpose of the meeting,  
being facilitated by Jamie O'Keefe alone, and frequently overworked.   
The social reality might have had something to do the desire of a  
particular group of people to attend to the business of allowing a  
delegation, and another group with a conflicting desire to make over  
everything concerning the composition of its membership conform to  
something that is not the case.  So if I am of the opinion that this  
kind of forcing is ecologically unsound -- the path of dominating is a  
false one -- where do I go to find out the truth



Thirdly;
>>
>>
>>
>> 6. appointment of new state com members
>>
>>
>>
>> State com agreed by consensus to the following proposal adopted as a
>> urgent action: appointment of the following new members to state com,
>> with
>> appointments to begin July 15th, subject to confirmation by the
>> appointed
>> members of their continued willingness to serve:
>>
>>
>>
>> Lyn Mesa
>>
>> Sandra Harris
>>
>> Lisa Richards
>>
>> Amanda Sanderson
>>
>> Terezinaj Cardosa
>>
>> David Maceswski
>>
>
> While i applaud that the meeting decided to seat the persons who came
> to be elected to statecom, all of which increased the diversity of
> statecom in youth, LGBT, low income, persons of color, there is
> nothing in the bylaws that say you can elect a statecom member with a
> delay. So they are now considered elected to statecom.
>
> Peace,
> Dan
So, again -- as parliamentarian -- you point to the rules.  This time  
with schadenfreude.  And I say this because I am  more disturbed to  
discover this in persons, than I am amused at seeing a parliamentarian  
with an unbuttoned fly and underwear showing.  Since I am deeply  
concerned,  Obviously there have been many errors.  But ever since the  
formation of an adversarial group -- whether it calls itself "A  
Minority Opinion" to whose spokespersons I was referred for discussion  
by its website -- or calls itself something else, errors and  
selectivity in the application of rules was  bound to occur.  Does the  
inclusion of the six people named above alter the reality of need for  
the strong participation of persons (I have talked and tried to at  
least three of them over the years) that you describe  " all of which  
increased the diversity of  statecom in youth, LGBT, low income,  
persons of color  .   .   ."
even begin to address the problem?  Is serious?  Or is it just an  
opportunity for a parliamentarian to say "Gotcha!" and then end with  
Peace, Dan.  I am truly disappointed by this sense of reality.  What  
is the truth?  Perhaps just that I am regarded as just an 'old fart?'

Thank you
Elie Yarden
MRGRA



> _______________________________________________
> AdCom mailing list
> AdCom at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/adcom
> To email Administration Committee members: adcom.members AT green- 
> rainbow DOT org