I have been following the thread of this conversation, and wish to add my thoughts. Most writers in this discussion have talked about how they themselves experience being in open space. The introverts have spoken, and they feel comfortable! :-) I have led a good number of events and there have definitely been comments about participants not being heard, and a feeling that convenors or participants have dominated and no one has the skills to facilitate better discussion. The law of two feet is great when one wishes to leave and find something more satisfying, but some have said that it is very disappointing to have to do that, when what they would prefer is to have the discussion more satisfying in the session! To be more directive to convenors goes against the principles of OS, so I don't know how to get around this.
Since often an event is a one-shot deal and not an on-going process within an organization, some participants have a hard time 'adjusting' to this new way of being together (taking responsibility etc) and aren't able to learn over the longer term to see its merits. Although most people respond favourably, I think that criticism should be looked at and discussed. If I am a quiet, less-than-secure person and I am a convenor, and someone in the group dominates, or several do, I may not feel able to do anything about it. And I don't want to leave, because the issue is important to me. It is unrealistic to expect people to take charge and speak up if they are unused to this process and don't have the confidence. I tell people that the advantages of holding a conference or large meeting in OS far outweighs the negatives, but I have been left wondering about these niggling negatives, and I think they need careful consideration. Cheers, Madeline Bakker New PathWays Guelph, Ontario http://www.web.net/~pathways
