[Businessmtg] Moving on to the next agenda

[Jon Markle]

I do not want to appear contentious, argumentative or disruptive.  I  
do however, have some concerns.

We all have our experiences and our expectations of what is  
appropriate and what is not.

My experiences are completely different and I do not appreciate such a  
high level of control, especially when it seeks to quiet any  
questions, open discussions, or valid dialogue.  That IS censorship  
and it is not well tolerated.

I propose that there should be a time that can be reasonably set aside  
in the business meeting, for open discusion of member concerns,  
without being censored by anyone.  If such a forum, outlet, for  
healthy debate, does not exist, then the group does not have the  
freedom to express it's true group conscious or give direction to it's  
Trusted Servants.  The "Trusted Servants" no longer can be trusted to  
carry out the groups will, because the group has been censored and  
cannot express their concerns, freely and openly, without fear of  
being banned.

I agree with your previous expression of dismay about the leanings of  
WSO.  I suggest that some of that has indeed drifted down to control  
issues in this group.  That is my observation as someone who has a few  
24 hours under his belt in Al-anon (and other Fellowships), but a  
newcomer to ASP.

I will give you that I have a lot to learn and understand about the  
workings here, but my very first impression upon joining was that  
there was an extreme level of control and THAT feels inappropriate.   
Your previous historical account tells me that I am not wrong.  Over  
the years, apparently more and more control has been layered on so  
that the TS's have absolute power now and we (group members) are NOT  
allowed to question that power.  That's the message I'm getting both  
from Dawn and now from you.

I've seen this mantra before . . . "As long as the trusted servant is  
doing the service the group asked them to
do and doing so within the guidelines, policies, and past practices of  
the
group without abusing their position for personal gain or furtherance of
personal agendas, then there is no evidence of control issues on their
behalf."

The problem with that idea is of course, that if the group is  
censored, is not allowed free discussion, not allowed to express their  
concerns, openly and without encumberment, then how do we know the  
Trusted Servants are acting on our behalf . . . they cannot listen to  
the group conscious when the group is censored in any way.  Censorship  
by it's very nature IS a control issue and abuse of power, whether  
personal agenda, personal gain (ego), or simply because the TS's have  
fallen into the trap of being in total control.

There MUST be a forum or a method by which all members can speak their  
mind, freely.  Both minority and majority must be heard.

I do want to express my dismay at not being able to talk freely about  
issues (should I have any), in a valid, recognizable and respectful  
forum within this Group.  If the business meeting is not that forum,  
then what is? Can we create such a place for ASP members to be able to  
freely talk about the issues we wish to talk about without censorship?

Thanks,

Jon

On Nov 8, 2009, at 12:48 AM, Steve Rankin wrote:

> It isn't about being censored. It's about the group setting  
> boundaries of
> what is appropriate behavior in the recovery meeting and what is  
> appropriate
> in the business meeting and the members of the group behaving within  
> those
> boundaries of acceptable behavior.  ASP, like most Al-Anon groups  
> does not
> discuss business issues in the recovery meeting, instead those  
> issues are
> restricted to the business meeting.  Furthermore, the business  
> meeting is
> not an opportunity for open discussion.  I've served at every level of
> Al-Anon f2f service and I've never attended a business meeting at  
> any level
> that was structured as an open discussion where members could freely
> exchange dialogue.  We have an agendas that the Secretary puts  
> together
> based on the needs of the meeting at that time as well as topics that
> individual members may have requested be placed on the agenda.   
> However, it
> is the Chair's responsibility to determine the order of the agenda
> items--that's one of the facets of leadership that comes with the job.
>
>
>
> Love and SERENITY,
> Steve