Michael,
With trepidation I continue this conversation despite the sense that
we're alone in a circle and everyone else on the list are using the law
of de-lete. I hope you don't mind if I reflect back a few of your
statements.
"What if anyone could indeed convene an osonos?"
I don't get your question. Anyone can indeed convene an OSonOS.
"what if the notes from all of these osonos events were posted to this
one site? ...so that the W came to denote ALL of our work IN open space
ON open space? wouldn't this be a gem of a demonstration that we are
living our practice and inviting anyone to join us as colleagues, not
just as trainees?"
It sounds like you're saying if you do an OSonOS and you don't post to
"this one site", then you're not living the practice (i.e. out of
integrity) and you are inviting people as trainees. Will you explain
these sentiments? I'm not getting it.
"[...] we insist on having this annual keynote event?"
My head spins and my heart hurts reading this statement. First of all,
the word "insist" connotes some kind of pushiness. Like it's being
imposed. For me what Phelim did in London was a wonderful and beautiful
expression of love and passion for Open Space - and for advancing this
powerful dialogic practice in the U.K. and in the world. Phelim, the
volunteers, and all the attendees of both the WOSonOS and the "road
show" of Open Space events leading up to the event made great sacrifices
and from my perspective were gloriously successful - despite the
postfacto criticisms. If anything, I think the intensity of the
criticisms are evidence of how much the London WOSonOS succeeded! We're
riding a big wave in the aftermath of that event!
My own desire to support Suzanne Daigle to hold this event again in
Florida in 2013 has absolutely nothing to do with the word "insist". I
wish you could understand how it stings when I hear that word - but
obviously it expresses some part of your experience. Will you say more
from your heart what's behind choosing that word?
Secondly, it sounds like a very harsh judgement for the WOSonOS to be
called a "keynote" event - like it's evidence that our community is out
of integrity since obviously Open Space is all about not having keynotes
(a sentiment I don't actually share). Do in fact all Open Space on Open
Space events need to be equal? If someone wants to hold an Open Space on
Open Space event just for those who speak Hawaiian - and they call it a
Hawaiian Open Space on Open Space (HOSonOS) - is that a problem? The
World Open Space community has been holding these WOSonOS's for decades
so it seems pretty clear we *like* to do these events. Your call to kill
them off deeply saddens me - and yet I sense this conversation is
critical. I hope you don't mind me sharing from the heart how I am
hearing your words, and if I am mishearing you I will work hard to keep
my mind and heart open.
Peace,
Harold
On 10/23/12 5:49 PM, Michael Herman wrote:
Harold, you said: But I'd be saddened if we somehow forbid the "W". It
feels like closing, not opening space.
What if instead we agreed to stretch the W, Harold? What if anyone
could indeed convene an osonos? what if anyone could indeed convene
an osonos gathering and what if it was as simple as posting an
invitation to the oslist and to a website shared by all osonos events?
what if the notes from all of these osonos events were posted to this
one site? ...so that the W came to denote ALL of our work IN open
space ON open space? wouldn't this be a gem of a demonstration that
we are living our practice and inviting anyone to join us as
colleagues, not just as trainees? what if learning open space came to
mean buy the book, try it out, and find an osonos gathering to process
it with others who cared about open space? what if there were than
many osonos's happening all around the world?
maintaining this special label on one annual event feels an awful lot
like the preferential treatment other groups give to the keynote
speaker. often it's quite and interesting talk, people spend a lot of
energy choosing these people and setting up a big room and podium and
screens and such... but we know they're missing something magical,
because everyone is not talking with everyone.
how can we be sure that we're not missing something amazing because we
insist on having this annual keynote event? and asking if there were
any other offers to host is a bit misleading, because the structure of
the process precludes most from even considering it. I was actually
thinking about convening one, but given the invitation presentation
hoopla, my plan was to offer to do all the admin details if harrison
would reserve that camden church again. but suzanned called me before
i could call harrison. the point is the habit/structure we have makes
many things impossible to consider, in the same way that a keynote
speaker makes it hard (not impossible, but harder) for people to
connect with others who share their passion. we can't assume that
because everyone is listening to the speaker politely that they all
care or that they don't have other, greater passions and gifts to offer.
m
--
Harold Shinsato
har...@shinsato.com <mailto:har...@shinsato.com>
http://shinsato.com
twitter: @hajush <http://twitter.com/hajush>
