[Businessmtg] Business Meeting item #2

[Steve Rankin]

Hi ASPers,

 

I guess it's my turn to say a few things about this & that . . . 

 

This is going to be a long post, so I’m going to list the issues I’m
covering immediately and then put them in all CAPS in the body along with
=========== separating issues to try to help folks make sense of it.  Since
the server will convert this to plain text, my formatting will be lost and
this might get even harder to read.  So, I’ve made a copy & posted it on my
web site with full formatting that’s much easier to read and has hyperlinks.
http://www.serenitysys.com/A_Serenity_Place/Business/hi_aspers_1.htm

 

 

A.    WHERE OUR MEMBERS COME FROM

B.    OLA-IS

C.    WHAT EXPENSES DO FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS HAVE?

D.    NEWCOMER PACKETS @ ASP

E.     PRIORITY OF EXPENSES

F.     WSO AND THE ONLINE AL-ANON COMMUNITY

G.    WHO ATTENDS BUSINESS MEETINGS

 

 

A. WHERE OUR MEMBERS COME FROM

 

1.     We get members from 

a.      direct referrals from other members, 

b.     links from OLA-IS, WSO,

c.      Google & other Internet search engines.  

2.     Even though the ASP site on my server hasn’t been the official ASP
site for nearly 2 years, it still comes up on one of the first pages on
Google.  Note that ALL the links on my old ASP web site were updated to
Dawn’s email address and the new ASP web site in May 2006—over a year and a
half ago.

3.     WSO still gives MY email address to new folks instead Dawn’s email
address.  This is in spite of many attempts by both Dawn & I to correct
this.  Therefore new member inquiries that come to ASP via WSO arrive in my
email box.

4.     OLA-IS also still lists my email address & my old ASP web site BUT we
believe that most folks that find ASP via OLA-IS click on the ASP hyperlink
and not the email link to the List Administrator.  Since the old web site
has long been updated with current links new folks arriving via OLA-IS never
realize they visited the old site for a few moments on their way.  

5.    In the last 7 months I’ve personally received 38 inquires about ASP.  

 

More statistics – all pertain to last month . . .

 

6604 people visited my web site last month.  Some of them were looking for
info on Al-Anon.  Others were looking for info on RVing, Mercedes-Benz or
something else.  I’ve culled the statistics of data pertaining to those
other interests.

 

547 people visited my ASP web site home page last month 

156 visited “More Info” page, a precursor to joining ASP

110 visited the “Misc Links” page

Total: 616  ‘unique’ visitors

 

229 people arrived via Google

143 via OLA-IS

121 via About.com

86 via Yahoo

19 via MSN

18 via NJ-al-anon.org

Total: 616  ‘unique’ referrer links

BTW, last month was a typical month.  The numbers vary ever so slightly from
month to month.

 

As you can see 616 people visited the old ASP web site last month AND 616
arrived via some kind of independent search of their own.  NOT via personal
referral or WSO.  In other words, not one single person found ASP via WSO
last month.  

 

Of all of those folks that found the old ASP web site and those who found
the new ASP web site, 76 sent an inquiry to the LA or Membership committee.
Of those, 40 joined and 32 were still members on Jan 27th.  

 

If you extrapolate this data, you will realize that something like 100,000
people have visited the ASP web site, roughly 10,000 have contacted ASP,
perhaps 5,000 have joined and 308 are currently members. 

 

Compared to a f2f meeting ASP is HUGE and a major role in the Al-Anon
fellowship.  And frankly, I think this scares the crap out of the
establishment.  

 

I started ASP on May 1, 1996 and ASP grew just fine with out WSO.  We made
no attempts to improve our visibility on the search engines, unlike another
I know.  So we only grew to 200 members while they grew to 700.  ASP has had
200-something members for the last 10 years so there is little reason to
believe that WSO has anything significant to do with our membership, or that
it ever has.  

 

Now, I know that some people have found ASP via WSO, but IMHO they are few
and far between.  Most of our members come from all over and find ASP
without using an Al-Anon service entity.  Those that do find ASP via an
Al-Anon service entity do so via OLA-IS

 

 

B.     OLA-IS

1.     Almost 10 years ago several members of different online meetings got
together and formed OLA-IS; On-Line Al-Anon-Information Service.

2.     Other online meetings elected OLA-IS representatives and OLA-IS began
the process of defining itself, putting up a web site, etc.

3.     By all normal measures OLA-IS was successful and even today a Google
search for “online Al-Anon” gives OLA-IS the #1 response.

4.     The first year (1998) OLA-IS made a $486 donation to WSO.  Additional
donations were made in the amount of $500 & $240 in subsequent years.

5.     OLA-IS hosted a room at the Al-Anon International Conference in Salt
Lake City in 1998 at a cost of nearly $1000.  The room was equipped with
networked computers & set up to provide Al-Anon members an opportunity to
experience an online Al-Anon meeting.  IMHO, OLA-IS has been a major success
in its public outreach function—refer back to the statistics above and you
can see that a large percentage of people find ASP via OLA-IS

6.     I believe it was in 2005 that WSO decreed that OLA-IS can not be an
Information Service because it doesn’t have a geographic basis.  The result
has been devastating to OLA-IS.  Subsequent donations to OLA-IS have dropped
dramatically and meetings have ceased.

7.     A number of members of OLA-IS have been trying to work with WSO on
incorporating an online participation at the Al-Anon International
Convention in Philadelphia later this year but WSO has put them off again
and again for the last couple of years saying that the plans weren’t ready
yet.  Anyone who has had anything to do with planning a big event knows that
the majority of the planning is done a long time in advance.  After over 2
years of OLA-IS folks reminding WSO of their desire to participate, WSO has
not made ANY effort to include the online community in the upcoming
convention. 

8.     Someone here said that OLA-IS was an outside entity.  That makes no
sense to me.  If this was true, then why did WSO accept their donations
BEFORE WSO acted to strip it of its status as an Information Service.  

9.     Where ever two or more people gather together in the name of Al-Anon
you have an Al-Anon meeting.  Who has the right to take that away?  

 

 

 

C.     WHAT EXPENSES DO FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS HAVE?

1.     Rent

a.      Every meeting and group has rent.  Sometimes the facility doesn’t
charge rent so the meeting finds a creative way to pay for the use of the
facility in lieu of a formal rent

2.     Refreshments

a.      Many Al-Anon meetings have coffee, tea and condiments supplied from
group funds.

3.     Literature

a.      Almost every Al-Anon meeting gives a Newcomer’s packet to the
newcomers.  

b.     Many meetings also provide pamphlets FREE to newcomers and regular
members.  Some meetings charge their cost for pamphlets.

c.      Books are generally sold at cost

4.     Insurance

a.      Some meetings are required by their landlord to provide insurance.
Often, the District has insurance which is able to cover this requirement,
but in those situations the meeting then incurs a responsibility to donate
sufficient funds to the District to adequately cover their fair share of the
District’s insurance policy—something that meeting may not have done
previously.  

5.     Trusted Servant expenses

a.      Travel to District meetings

b.     Travel to Area Assemblies

c.       Telephone and photocopying expenses

 

 

 

 

D.    NEWCOMER PACKETS @ ASP

1.     IMHO, providing a Newcomer’s Packet to new members of ASP is a
natural & totally legitimate thing to do. 

2.     I can’t comprehend how this is enabling the new comer.  

a.      If it was, why does AFG have this packet????

b.     If giving a newcomer a free packet is enabling, then driving to their
house and picking them up for their first meeting must also be enabling.
Yet, that is a classic 12th Step call.  

c.      If giving a newcomer a packet is enabling, then leaving literature
in doctor’s offices, etc for anyone that hasn’t even attended a meeting must
be enabling, yet we have entire service structures around doing just that.

d.     A Newcomer’s Packet is simply a small sampling of Al-Anon literature.
It is not like giving away ODAT’s or Courage to Change.  On the other hand,
it might be an impetus for a newcomer to acquire more CAL.

e.      IMHO, what IS enabling is folks telling newcomers not to contribute
at their first meetings—let the newcomer make their own decisions about
their money!!   Jeeeesh.

3.     How could we do that?

a.      The server automatically sends new members a Welcome Letter from the
List Administrator when they are subscribed to the list.

b.     The Welcome Letter could include a new paragraph offering to snail
mail a Newcomer’s Packet to the new member & tell them that if they would
like to receive a Newcomer’s Packet, they need to send a request to the List
Administrator with their mailing address.

c.      I know this may sound like a burden for the LA, but roughly 50% of
our newcomers are not new to the program and I’m only a fraction of the
other newcomer’s would follow through.  Therefore, the actual number of
mailings per month would probably be only a handful.

4.     As for the idea of ASP providing other Al-Anon literature for ASP
members would be a monumental task.  

a.      Most f2f meetings carry only a small assortment of literature

b.     The capital cost of building a literature inventory can be
staggering.  When I was Area Treasurer, our Area Literature Coordinator made
a $6,000 literature purchase and that was AFTER the Area voted to close the
Area Literature Depot!  Just imaging the night mare for the Treasurer, too.


c.      Money & theft.  I personally know of two situations involving
embezzlement of Al-Anon funds and literature money is a major factor.  BTW,
I’m talking about $15,000 in one case and over $20,000 in the other. 

d.     Who here would decide what ASP should carry or not carry?  Not me!
Which book to buy belongs to the member, not the meeting.

e.      WSO’s web site is an adequate source of CAL for any member of
Al-Anon & I don’t see how ASP could make ordering literature any easier for
the member.

5.     Whether something is the right thing to do or not is NOT a matter of
convenience.  

a.      All too often I see groups decide to do something because someone is
willing to do the footwork, or not do something simply because no one
appears to be willing to do the footwork.

b.     Please look at this issue on its merit and appropriateness.  If it
has merit and if it appropriate for an Al-Anon meeting, then it must be an
OK thing for ASP to do.  If we determine that it is OK for ASP to do, THEN
we can look at HOW we could do that.  

 

 

 

E.      PRIORITY OF EXPENSES

1.     A meeting does not always have sufficient funds to pay for every
expense that the members feel is appropriate.  Therefore, it follows that a
list of priorities should be established so the meeting can make appropriate
adjustments to its spending when donations fail to meet expenses.

a.      Necessary meeting expenses

1.     Rent

2.     Newcomer Literature packet

b.     Trusted servant expenses

1.     Travel expenses to District meetings and Area Assemblies

c.      Less than necessary meeting expenses

1.     Pamphlets provided for free

2.     Refreshments

 

 

 

 

F.     WSO AND THE ONLINE AL-ANON COMMUNITY

1.     This is a terribly sad & frustrating issue and IMHO a classic example
of how the leadership of Al-Anon is focused on looking good and maintaining
control.

a.      The Service Manual states “As the principal service center of the
fellowship, the WSO  . . . is the center, not the head; it serves but does
not control or direct.”  I repeat: the WSO does not control or direct.  If
this is really true, then why do we have the following?

b.     The problem of looking good and controlling goes back much further
than the online meetings.

c.      Many years ago, someone at WSO changed the wording of the 11th
Tradition because is sounded better.  Only recently, has this issue surfaced
and WSO is in the process of correcting the wording of the 11th Tradition in
our literature as it is reprinted.  In spite of what Steps 9 & 10 tell me
about making amends for being wrong, the WSO response is much more terse
“Please refer to the 2003 and 2004 Conference Summaries re the changes in
the Step, Traditions, and Concepts of Service including the General
Warranties.  We reverted to the original text in all cases as none of the
changes were ever approved by the Conference and were frozen by the
Conference Charter.”  No word of WSO being wrong.  

d.     The stories in Al-Anon literature LOOK like they are the stories of
Al-Anon members, but they are not.  A young woman who was a member of my
home group in California was told her story was going to be in the new “How
Al-Anon Work” which came out at the 1995 AA International in San Diego.  I
got my copy at the International but I couldn’t find her story.  WSO had
hired a professional writer to “blend stories” so the stories became what
WSO wanted them to be instead of a true Al-Anon story.  This time though,
the member was well connected with the service structure in Al-Anon and
through the efforts of the Delegate, WSO eventually admitted to the practice
of blending stories, had the professional writers speak at Al-Anon events to
describe the practice, and finally agreed to end the practice.  NOTE: this
process required the action of an interested Delegate to get WSO to admit to
the practice and to stop it—how will the online community succeed without
access to the Al-Anon service structure.

e.      WSO delisted ASP from their list of online meetings merely because
someone told them they couldn’t find us.  WSO made NO attempt to contact me
before delisting ASP.  WSO also failed to respond to me when I inquired
about how and why they delisted ASP.  In other words, there is NO
accountability at WSO.  Would WSO delist a f2f meeting if a member got lost
and couldn’t find a meeting—of course not.  Below is a quote from the letter
I received from WSO.  Note that the problem is they have the URL wrong, yet
they delisted ASP first and asked questions later.

“The reason for that particular e-mail was that we were advised by someone
who was trying to join your on-line meeting, A Serenity Place (WSO ID #
62413), that your web site address, www.serenitysys.com/a serenity place was
not available.

At this time, we are removing the meeting from the On-line meeting list
because the web site address is not available. Please write or e-mail me to
let me know when it is available, so that we can add it back on to the
On-line Meeting List.”

f.       WSO has imposed oppressive requirements on the use of CAL in the
online meetings.  Requirements which are unprecedented in the f2f meetings,
even though many f2f meetings duplicate CAL for use in their meeting.  

g.      WSO failed again and again for over 1 ½ years to update the contact
info for ASP.  Each time, WSO either ignored our request or they promised
that it had been changed, but in fact it wasn’t.  Dawn received a note from
WSO a couple of weeks ago promising yet again that the info was finally
current.  I accessed it 2 days later and found myself and my web site.
Again.  Finally, tonight it is correct.  

h.      WSO has promised for 2 years to make OLA-IS a part of the
International in Philadelphia.  It’s always the same—we’ll discuss it at the
next meeting and contact you.  And nothing happens.  Nothing.

i.       WSO didn’t request info from the online meetings for their database
until June 2004.  Hmmmm, ASP was over 8 years old and WSO is just getting
around to this.  Plus, this only 1 year before the first planning meetings
for the International in Philadelphia.  

j.       WSO published a “Guideline for Electronic Meetings”.  OK, I’m
certainly not the center of the universe in Al-Anon but as the Meeting
Contact for ASP you’d think that I might hear SOMETHING about this before it
was published.  Nope.  The online community was not given a role in
developing the Guideline.  

1.     Interestingly, the Guideline was almost exclusively about donations
to WSO.  Not just one mention in the Guideline, or even two mentions, but
three separate statements in that Guideline about the necessity of the
online meetings to donate to WSO.  No question about their motives in that
Guideline!

2.     Something I learned a long time ago:  It’s OK to say something once,
but if you say it more than once you are trying to control the situation.

k.      WSO published a new version of the “Guideline for Electronic
Meetings” a couple of years later.  This time, I did receive an advance
notice.  I received a request to comment on the FINAL draft of the new
Guideline and was given just two weeks to do so.  So much for having any
real opportunity for input.

l.       Policy regarding group problems

1.     The Service Manual states “Some groups have a business or Steering
Committee composed of present and recent officers to deal with group policy
. . . and other group problems.”

2.     In another section of the Service Manual on Group Problems, it states
“The WSO can only offer suggestions by relating the shared experiences of
other groups or by providing the appropriate references in existing service
material.

3.     There is NO mention in the Service Manual on the issue of a member’s
disruptive behavior.  This is in spite of the fact that the problem has
existed in f2f meetings for many years.

4.     Yet, in 2004 the WSO wrote the online meetings regarding how we dealt
with problems that stated “ . . . should be a decision made by the entire
meeting . . .” and “. . . the decision would come from an informed meeting
discussion . . .”  The letter closes with “A copy of this letter will be
sent to those members who raised the concerns.” Legalese that has no place
in here & serves as a threat. 

5.     Why is it OK for a f2f meeting to have business meetings and a
steering committee to deal with group policy and group problems according to
the Service Manual and yet an online meeting is supposed to adhere to some
other policy as stated by WSO?  

m.    The worst behaviors I have ever seen online were by a WSO staff.  Not
only was their behavior outrageous, they claimed their positions at WSO made
them experts.  Both of the people in these examples sent me private messages
that outlined their contempt for the general membership of Al-Anon.  

2.     It was 12 years ago next week that I spent an afternoon with Ric B,
Executive Director of WSO discussing how to apply the Traditions in an
Al-Anon meeting and how the online meetings would fit into the service
structure and Al-Anon as a whole.  

a.      This while I was the Business Chair of CAFG and before I started
ASP.  

b.     Ric made it clear to me at that meeting in February 1996 that the
online meetings would be made a part of a 3-year plan to evaluate the online
meetings AND at the end of the 3-year plan, the plan would be renewed for
another 3 years, AND at the end of that 3-year plan, the plan would be
renewed for another 3 years, etc., etc., etc.  

c.      FYI: CAFG was the first online Al-Anon meeting available to the
general public.  There were other “meetings” and bulleting boards before
CAFG but they were only available to folks employed by the same company or
who had a common ISP, etc.  ASP was the second online Al-Anon meeting
available to the general public.  

3.     As for not controlling the f2f meetings?

a.      What about the new RULES on Alateen sponsorship?  Not guidelines,
rules.  

b.     Why does Al-Anon publish 19 books and more on the way, yet AA has
only 6?  I guess it means we’re 3 times as sick as they are!!  :-)  IMHO,
less effort on publishing new literature and more on serving the fellowship
would be a good thing.

 

Jeeeesh, I could go on and on about my experiences with WSO and Al-Anon
service beyond the group level.  The unfortunate truth of the matter is that
the WSO does very little to serve Al-Anon and often creates or compounds
problems within the fellowship.  I doesn’t matter whether it is f2f or
online Al-Anon.  

 

 

 

 

G.     WHO ATTENDS BUSINESS MEETINGS

1.     Who ever wants to, that’s who.  

a.      Well, except for the WSC which is closed to Delegates and certain
staff at WSO.  

b.     Since only Delegates can attend the WSC, they are the only ones in
Al-Anon that have the privilege of that very special experience.  If you
have any doubts about how special that experience is, just ask a Delegate or
Past Delegate.

c.      Speaking of Past Delegates, why does a certain class of Al-Anon
member get referred to by a special title “Past Delegate”  ?  Must be
because they are special.  Again, just ask one.  

2.     But, here at ASP, like most meetings ANYONE can attend the business
meeting if they wish.  

3.     But, here at ASP, like most meetings very few want to.  

a.      If you schedule the business meeting before the regular meeting,
most will come too late for the business meeting.

b.     If you schedule the business meeting after the regular meeting, most
will leave before the business meeting.

c.      If you schedule the business meeting during the regular meeting,
most will avoid it anyway.

4.     As a result, we have no quorums in our business meetings.  Who ever
chooses to attend the business meeting gets to participate in the process of
deciding on the business issues of the meeting.  

 

 

If you got this far, you’re a brave soul and I thank you for listening.  I
hope that you can appreciate the spirit in which I’ve struggled on writing
this over the last week—the spirit of the Al-Anon fellowship and our
following the Steps, Traditions, and Concepts.  As they are written and as
WE interpret them for OUR meeting.

 

Love and SERENITY,

Steve