Dear All, you are a wise community which I can ask any question. I don't have a question, or it is too much the same: How to...
Yesterday (your today for some Western US coasters) we had a 'repetiotion' to Non-profit organizations on Novosibirsk (NPOs) in preparation of Civil Forum in our region. For more then a month we were arguing - whether to do a Conference as a Civil Forum, and how. Seeing our quarrel the representative of the Novosibirsk Administration said: I see, you don't have a common ground, so I will report to our Governour of the NSK Region (who wrote his resolution to support the initiative - as the problem is sponsors and facilitiess, as usual, but also we are looking for partnership - it is good, we need to use the situation!)...., that you don't need a conference yet.... My oppinion that we need it just because we don't have any common ground, and we need to discuss how can we develop our region together - the local governments and population (NPOs, business, administrations) He also said, that we have... a nice woking coordinating commettees and some great programs with some NPOs... is not it enough? So yesterday we gathered 40 organizations, and the topic the organizers come with was: "Interaction of NPOs and local governments in building Civil Society" How do you think such a topic - a very general one - could be 'discussed' in the OST. Though I tryed while oppening to ask the question like: So, now we need to find out why do we need to interact and what is Civil Society then... so people gathered on this mini-conference, who were intrigued by seeing what is OST, but still they are interested in providing Civil Forum - there was a lot of passion - came up with those questions: 1. What kind of arrangements should be make for development of social defence of population? 2. Civil Forum as the instrument for more succesful colaboration with local governments and business people with the goal of solving citizens' problems in our region. 3. The role of nonprofit organizations as the specific centers of sustainable development of territories. Mechanisms of interaction of nonprofit organizations and local governments and personal oppinion about role and place of Civil Counsil and Civil Forum. 4. The participation of nonprofit organizations in the future elections of 2003. Are we ready to change the Quality of our participation? The candidate from pupulation. 5. The participation of NPOs in preventing drugs-using, homelessness and carelessness in schools, orphanages and permanent housings of the city. 6. The concrete help to desadaptivated groups of population with education and seach for harmony (Social technologies). 7. Ecological safety: the rights of people and the rights of nature. 8. The prevention of conflicts through development of Centers of sustainable development of territories. 9. The federal reforms of house service and the citizens' freedom on the territories. 10. Development of Novosibirsk - the general (common) concern of all citizens. Mechanisms of taking people's oppininion in cosideration. 11. Development of the conditions for the encreasing of economical activity of the population. 12. Including eldery people into the active life of society as people with experience and wiseness. 13. The situation of drugs-using in the city and the region: medical, juridical, social aspects. The regional program for struggling with drugs-using. 14. The realization of the international youth ecological peacemaking project "The peace trees - Siberia-2003" 15. Information about women-leaders, the women's movement: the achievements, participation in social and political life of the city and the region on the Web-site. You see, they are most general, and very 'Russian' - not concrete - though GREAT! (I'm not saying even that there are no budgets in any discussed projects, or some more real program (who, what, and so on)... - it would be really HIGHEST level if somebody will think about it), but still this is the starting point for work (for me) Most people were very excited, but there were some, who said that they were waiting for more concrete planning... and it will be the same on the Civil Forum. My idea, to have all this spectrum, not to be afraid, but then to go to the next session with more detailization (may be without prioritization?). so to start working on programs.... So, now if we still manage to persuade our administration, or will find other sponsors for organizing this Forum, how could we bring people to real 'doing', to programs, not only talking? I know the answer - nohow. But could topic move them closer, if we name is somehow like "Development of the NSK region in partnership of NPOs and Local governments" It sounds funny even for me, though I'm not sure I put it OK in English, what I mean is that we never came to the gooed 'planning' session. it is always 2-3 hours we have and I do remember Harrison Owen oppinion (I have a video with his West... something opening) where he said: the first day people are concerned with trying to be on as many group discussions as possible, but on the other day they come to planning sessions, HERE it seems, that people need to be pushed at least by question to come to this. So for now we do plan (if it happens and happens in OST way) the whole day of OS and planning session in partnership, but I'm not sure how to do it, and whether we can use the topic as a 'moving' stimul? Best wishes to all Elena Marchuk Novosibirs. Scientific Center of Siberia. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Corrigan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:04 AM Subject: Re: Democracy and Open Space > We had a conversation earlier in the year about forms of convergence and > action planning that did not require voting. In February I tried out > the 4N method that Michael Herman and I hammered out (Michael named > it...he gets the credit for News Now Next Nuts - and he can have it!). > It worked really well. The record of the conversation and the story are > on The Meta Network at > http://community.tmn.com/tmn/swebsock/0007715/0679001/CS41/viewitem.cml? > 22+6+54+23+0+0+1+x#here > > Not voting is empowering. People see what work needs to be done and > pick up the tasks. People move by choice to the work that holds the > most meaning for them, and new structures emerge. I think voting places > predetermined boundaries about what needs to happen. As much as we can > say that "every issues is still important" voting implies that some > issues are more important than others, even if things are ranked > strictly according to where people's energies are at. The only time I > have found voting appropriate was at the end of a one day meeting, when > my sponsor wanted things prioritized. At that time, we gave each person > five dots and asked them to rank the most important issues for the > group. That was all. There was no follow up within the OST meeting on > these issues, they simply ranked them and left them at that. With a > clear understanding of what we were doing, no one felt slighted. But in > contexts where the voting then leads to groups to work out those issues, > I have found people generally miffed at the way that whole thing goes. > > Maybe it's me (Harrison might think so...he once described the aversion > to voting as "Canadian.") > > Another thing that bugs me about voting is that it says "wasn't that > Open Space thing interesting? Okay, let's get back to reality..." In > other words, it doesn't model the new reality, but reinforces the old > one. I have had people express exactly this disappointment to me. They > have said "Oh rats...we were really starting to get somewhere..." > > And this "getting somewhere..." Doesn't that echo John's notion of > democracy as a journey? I don't think that democracy IS voting, nor do > I think that voting in and of itself is democracy. To reduce one to the > other removes the role and responsibilities of the citizen to act and > improve the system. Perhaps real democracy invites this action. Voting > is just a way to see what's popular. > > So OST is "democratic" if it invites folks to be citizens, encourages > them to use their feet, and provides a way for outcomes to unfold > without domination from powerful interests. > > Enough musing for now. > > Chris > > > --- > CHRIS CORRIGAN > Consultation - Facilitation > Open Space Technology > > Bowen Island, BC, Canada > http://www.chriscorrigan.com > [email protected] > > * > * > ========================================================== > [email protected] > ------------------------------ > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, > view the archives of [email protected], > Visit: > > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html > * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected], Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
